Print 74 comment(s) - last by TSS.. on Feb 17 at 6:49 AM

  (Source: The Pirate Bay via TorrentFreak)
No more torrents will help more content to be shared, render "copyright watchdogs" more toothless

The Pirate Bay has long been synonymous with one thing -- torrents.  The world's largest torrent site has had more than its fair share of legal headaches [1][2][3] over the years for promoting the ubiquitous file-sharing mechanism.  Consequentially on Feb. 29 in will be taking what on the surface appears to be a mind-blowing move -- deleting all torrents hosted directly on the site, which are being actively shared by more than 10 individuals.

But in reality this move is not as mind-blowing and drastic a departure from the site's operational model as some are thinking/hoping/fearing.

The site will continue to host the content, where possible, via magnet links.  All new content will be hosted via magnetic links.

The new approach is a "step forward in technology", according to the site's admins.  And it's the worst nightmare of the Recording Industry Association of America and Motion Picture Association of America.  

The Pirate Bay can now be compressed to a 90 MB torrent-free site, for easy hosting.  Under the new scheme scores of new users will be able to host free proxy servers for The Pirate Bay, helping it escape takedown attempts, local firewalls, or ISP restrictions.

At the same time The Pirate Bay washes its hands of any of the actual process of file-sharing.  It is simply hosting magnet links -- links to torrents which share the same unique hash value.  In that regard, thousands, if not millions of users will be privately hosting the scores of torrents that make up The Pirate Bay users worldwide know and love.

Magnet links

And it will be far harder for lawyers and regulators to pin wrongdoing on The Pirate Bay -- assuming that the members of the international judicial committee understand how the technology works and are willing to give a fair trial, at least.  In short, magnet links are the future of filesharing and The Pirate Bay's decision to force their adoption is a sound one in terms of its future.

Magnet links represent the supreme ultimatum to media organizations (many of which themselves engage in active for-profit piracy that steals hundreds of millions of dollars from independent artists annually):

Develop fair, reasonably priced, accessible content distribution and create content that users think is actually worth paying for, or you can and will be pirated.

In essence it will be impossible for the RIAA or MPAA to put millions of Americans in prison or fine them.  So ultimately, magnet links and other new technologies may force the RIAA, MPAA, and government to abandon traditional enforcement of file-sharing.  Thus the groups' long-standing dream of taking down The Pirate Bay's torrents has just become their worst nightmare. 

It should be interesting how the self-proclaimed "anti-piracy" advocates by day, for-profit pirates by night globally react to this new technological marvel.

Sources: The Pirate Bay, Torrent Freak

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By nafhan on 2/14/2012 4:00:52 PM , Rating: 3
That's just another excuse to pirate things. You don't need a $60 game right now . If you can't afford $60, there should be a ton of games that are 2 or 3 years old you could buy for less than $10. If there are NO games from 2 or 3 years ago that you haven't played and you can't afford to pay $60 for a game, I'll go out on a limb and say you spend to much time playing video games :) The "having a little patience" system works great for me. I got Deus Ex Human Revolution on sale on Steam a few months back for $10. That game was worth my $50 way more so than Mirror's Edge! If that game had a developer tip jar, I would have dropped some money in.

Anyway, not judging, I think games are overpriced, and I'm just mentioning that there are legal alternatives that will let you play them for less.

By Boze on 2/14/2012 5:32:02 PM , Rating: 2
I think games are overpriced

Are you completely off your rocker? Games are overpriced?

My parents paid $49.98 plus tax for The Legend of Zelda in 1987 after I got all As in second grade. I got a new game every time I scored perfect scores for each report card.

The last game I bought was Mass Effect 2 for $49.99.

One cent of inflation in over 25 years? And you call that overpriced? The most expensive game I ever bought was Chrono Trigger, at $69.99 plus tax, in 1994 or 5, or whenever it came out.

If you adjust my parents' purchase of The Legend of Zelda for inflation, it would cost $101.50 today.

You could buy a can of Coca-Cola for a quarter in 1987. Now good luck finding a can for less than $0.65.

Think about that for awhile. Think about it hard.

By JediJeb on 2/14/2012 6:49:12 PM , Rating: 3
Cokes around here are still $0.50 in the vending machines and if you buy a 12 pack they are less than that.

Sure that Zelda game would cost over $100 now adjusted for inflation, but what would the game console also cost if adjusted similarly? The technology has advanced so much that making a game is much less expensive now than then, and honestly some of those games back then had more thought put into their story lines than some of the junk today. How many ways can you shoot zombies anyhow?!

How many movies do you need about zombies also? Seems half the movies out recently are either another way to tell a zombie story or a remake of a remade movie that happened to be a hit 50 years ago when it was originally made the first time.

By someguy123 on 2/14/2012 10:47:06 PM , Rating: 2
The technology has advanced so much that making a game is much less expensive now than then

This is just insane. The average game costs about twenty million dollars and a fleet of employees to make nowadays. Compare that to Rare making games with a handful of guys, or hell Will Wright making games in his basement.

Games are literally cheaper than they used to be, yet they cost much more to make, and take longer to make. I don't know where this idea that games are overpriced comes from. Just because someone tosses a game out on android/ios market for free doesn't mean that games cost nothing to make.

By TSS on 2/15/2012 6:27:57 AM , Rating: 3
That was not what he ment.

The legend of zelda cost $6 million to develop back in 1985-86. If you where to make the exact same game today, same graphics same functionality, you could probably make it for under $100,000 of todays money, which would be $50,000 in 1986 money. While that $6 million back then would be $12 million now.

That's the point. The same amount of money spent got you zelda 2 in 1987 and call of duty 4 in 2007.

Games have gotten cheaper because of economy of scale. Zelda was the first game to hit more then 1 million units sold in the USA, and managed 6,5 million worldwide, while targeted at a pretty broad audience. CoD4 managed 13 million sales worldwide while being targeted at a pretty select audience (the action FPS crowd), with much more market saturation from similar games. There's simply a much larger market.

Even so you're not correct because, minecraft. Cost nothing to make, made ~$60 million i'm sure of and probably another ~10 million i missed. The old school way lives, there's just a huge, mature market ontop of it which makes it a bit more rare to come by.

By superstition on 2/15/2012 4:33:02 PM , Rating: 2
Cartridge ROMs were also more expensive to produce, physically, than digital downloads.

Atari used to play freelancers to shrink code so it would fit into smaller ROMs. That's how Jobs' first known con came to pass.

By someguy123 on 2/16/2012 1:15:12 AM , Rating: 2
That doesn't make any sense either, because those types of games are sold for dollars, or given away for free on platforms like android/iOS. Minecraft is also sold for 15 dollars, and is a rare case in general since it was an infiniminer clone developed by one person. Those types of indie games normally track to thousands, not millions like minecraft, which is why minecraft gets so much attention.

Games considered out of date and easily made thanks to software advancements are incredibly cheap, and games utilizing massive developers are also cheaper. How exactly are games more expensive nowadays?

By TSS on 2/17/2012 6:49:18 AM , Rating: 2
How exactly are games more expensive nowadays?


What do you think costs more money to make? A main character which consists of a 2D sprite or a main character consisting of 10,000 polygons + rig + animations + diffuse skin + specular skin + normal map made from a 1,5 million polygon version of the same model?

By pwnsweet on 2/14/2012 6:53:52 PM , Rating: 2
If you adjust my parents' purchase of The Legend of Zelda for inflation, it would cost $101.50 today.

That's about exactly what we pay for games here in Australia.

By StevoLincolnite on 2/14/2012 10:20:19 PM , Rating: 2
That's about exactly what we pay for games here in Australia.

And it sucks.

They wonder why people Pirate? They should lower the price so it's more affordable.

Heck, our dollar is higher than the USD yet no price drops on games, it's simply crap.
They can all burn in hell for being money hungry; price gauging wankers.

By derricker on 2/14/2012 8:29:13 PM , Rating: 1
Are you completely off your rocker? Games are overpriced?

Well, if you take in account not that you no longer purchase games, they grant you a license to use, and they intend to move to server side and/or streaming, yeah, games have become of the most over expensive utter pieces of shit you can find in a market.

Your comparison with Zelda is moot, back then you paid for the game and took the cart home and it was yours to do as you saw fit, including trading it with friends and selling it used.

$60 for a POS they won't allow me to own, yes, absolutely over priced, $100+ for an actual purchase, fair price.

By someguy123 on 2/14/2012 10:50:00 PM , Rating: 3
That's how it's always been. Software has always been licensee, your zelda cart or otherwise. The only difference now is that people can regulate copying/distribution a bit using online verification. Yeah it sucks, but nothings changed when it comes to ownership.

Don't copy that floppy.

By superstition on 2/15/2012 4:34:21 PM , Rating: 2
Duplicating a floppy is not the same as re-selling a used game.

By someguy123 on 2/16/2012 1:16:56 AM , Rating: 2
That was just a reference to the old antipiracy campaigns. Google "don't copy that floppy".

By nafhan on 2/15/2012 9:56:48 AM , Rating: 2
So... you're telling me what I can think? Sorry, but that's dumb. To me (key words there) most games are not worth $50-$60. Therefore: "I think games are overpriced." If the economics of game development and the rate of inflation are important considerations for you when you purchase games... good for you, I guess? Personally, I buy stuff when the price matches what it's worth to me .

"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki