Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Limewire shutdown, permanently
Josh:
I wholeheartedly agree y0himba. I love the argument that companies should "Go after the user not the software" when the software, like it or not, is primarily used for piracy. Bit Torrent has many legit uses and is used by corporations across the world to help ease their bandwidth usage. Blizzard uses it for patch and game distribution, Microsoft for product distribution, quite a few movie companies use it for digital distribution of their products to the movie theaters, etc. Limewire, over the entire history of which I have seen the product, has not had a single legit use. Every person I've ever heard mention the product has referenced it in terms of piracy.
As the old saying goes, "If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck...it almost certainly is not a horse". The whole "Hey, there is a linux distribution being shared on there so this service is legit" argument is tired and old. If I place a Linux distribution on an ftp server along with every current Microsoft product (including keys), that does not make the ftp server legit even if I start the ftp server only hosting said Linux distribution. The primary purpose of said FTP server is for piracy of MS products, not linux distribution.
KynloStephen66515:
One of many to come, me thinks...
Source: http://www.torrentspy.com/
- The "Found Here" link takes you to: http://www.mpaa.org/piracy_LegalOpt.asp
Strangely, that page doesn't exsist.
(Also contains bad grammer on the 404 catch page)
"The page you are looking for is cannot be found.
Please try again later."
Tuxman:
There's still FrostWire. Who cares if the LimeWire software is dead when the Gnutella network is still alive?
Also, eMule will survive it anyway.
4wd:
The McMillan analogy nicely points out the contradiction in the court ruling though, which is where I wanted to go. i.e. If you accept things at face value (the RIAA case/perspective), then why should McMillan be allowed to produce weapons with obvious malign intent? It's ok for these fellows over here, but not these other fellows?-Renegade (October 28, 2010, 08:09 PM)
--- End quote ---
Wandering OT a little, I was going to respond to the McMillan comment previously but failed to do so but I'll tack it on here.
The term sniping, sniper or snipe was originally a military term and therefore in that context your argument may have been correct.
However, sniping has filtered into the general language and now encompasses the hunting of game animals and as such your comment "sniper rifles are for killing people" is not strictly valid.
Renegade:
However, sniping has filtered into the general language and now encompasses the hunting of game animals and as such your comment "sniper rifles are for killing people" is not strictly valid.
-4wd (October 31, 2010, 11:03 PM)
--- End quote ---
I have to differ on that. While a sniper rifle can be used to kill more than just humans, it's primary intended purpose is to kill people (both literally in its design and literally in its name).
"Snip(ing/er)" used in those contexts is slang, and not proper usage (not a literal usage).
It's slang in the same way that you might insult someone by calling them a doorknob or compliment them by calling their outfit "killer". Still common usage, but you don't literally "snipe" animals any more than you would grab someone and twist them in an attempt to go through them. :)
More specifically, "snipe" in the hunting context is anthropomorphism. It's the same anthropomorphism as "meat is murder" or "fur is murder". It's a literary device and not intended to actually change the meaning of the word. Rather, it's a juxtaposition to emphasize a point. e.g. Substituting in act of killing a person instead of the act of killing an animal for dramatic effect.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version