Magnus Posted February 10, 2005 Posted February 10, 2005 LokiTorrent got owned today by the MPAA http://www.lokitorrent.com/ It's interesting though - the last I heard they had acquried a group of lawyers and were raising funds to meet their monthly payments. I wonder what happened? Quote
Jolly Rogers Posted February 10, 2005 Posted February 10, 2005 People who download movies are cheap. Cheap folks won't fork out much to the LokiTorret legal protection fund. Little $ = lawyers walk. No lawyers = pwned by RIAA. Quote
Jawjaw Posted February 10, 2005 Posted February 10, 2005 I don't think they got enough money. I bet it would be tough to come up with enough court costs to compete against the MPAA. Quote
NERV Posted February 10, 2005 Posted February 10, 2005 looks more like a hacking to me, when suprnova went down they just put up a notice that they were no longer in service Quote
Agent ONE Posted February 10, 2005 Posted February 10, 2005 God that pisses me off. I love to see movie studios get ripped off. Quote
Zentrandude Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 they are sure cracking down on them. good thing i just rent movies since todays movies suck too much to watch at a theater. Quote
Shmitty Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 That name certainly made me laugh. I wonder what kind of success it could have though. Quote
Radd Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 God that pisses me off.I love to see movie studios get ripped off. I'm not familier with this site, though I'm mainly upset when the MPAA and RIAA shut down sites that are distribute material that neither group should have any say ovr, like independant music that the bands themselves distribute using MP3 (many webhosting services will not let you host MP3 files regardless of whether or not you own them yourself because of the RIAA's scare tactics), the like the deal with SomaFM, an internet radio broadcaster that does not use airwaves, and does not play RIAA music, yet has to pay thousands of dollars a year for the privilege of continuing to broadcast WHILE NOT PLAYING ANY RIAA MUSIC. Quote
NERV Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 the mpaa and riaa are both bullshit, movies have steadily been decreasing in length and quality while ticket prices and advirtisements have been going up, and with music, there is no way that a cd cost more than a cassette, when cassettes were dominant they wer elike $8, they promised that CD prices would go down, they went down a little but they should have gone down cheaper than cassettes since they are cheaper to make Quote
hevangel2 Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 Something is really wrong. If the site is indeed owned by MPAA, the MPAA icon should at least link to the MPAA website. Why can't any congressman brave enough to fight MPAA and RIAA on consumer's behave? The 99 year copyright period is way too much protection for those record and movie companies. All their intelliteral properties should be tax like real properites, and the longer the copyright period, the higher the tax. My scheme would be first year free, then add 10% per year up to 10 years, after that all copyright material should be released into public domain. Here is the moto: Downloading is illegal, but the law is immoral! Quote
Die, Alien Scum! Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 God that pisses me off.I love to see movie studios get ripped off. Yeah, screw the movie studios! They've been feeding us crap for too long! I mean, "Conan"? "Terminator"? "Total Recall"? "Predator"? The list is endless! I don't even want to think about "Commando", but since I like to wear chain mail and act all creepy-psycho, I have to mention it! LOL! Just kidding, Agent ONE! Ahhnold is da man! Quote
VF-19 Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 Oh well, it's sad that it did happen... Honestly, I use torrents like a VCR. I watch the tv shows I miss due to work. And yes I do have a real VCR, but I can't record because other people are watching the TV at the same time as my show, so I'm being "diplomatic". Quote
Agent ONE Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 God that pisses me off.I love to see movie studios get ripped off. Yeah, screw the movie studios! They've been feeding us crap for too long! I mean, "Conan"? "Terminator"? "Total Recall"? "Predator"? The list is endless! I don't even want to think about "Commando", but since I like to wear chain mail and act all creepy-psycho, I have to mention it! LOL! Just kidding, Agent ONE! Ahhnold is da man! I almost had a heart attack. Quote
Jawjaw Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 I think it is wrong to have the attitude of "screw them" and then turn around and download movies. It's obvious that there is lots of downloading going on in the world and it would be stupid for the MPAA not to do anything about it. However, if they think downloading is the root of all their lack of sales, they are wrong. It's obvious that movie quality/originality is way down and prices and ads are way up. Why would I pay more than $20 to bring my wife to a lame sequel of an already lame movie? There is hardly any movies that I care to see anymore. Ones I do see usually disappoint. I suppose it's not PC to make kickass movies anymore or something. Quote
Godzilla Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 (edited) Wow. And I thought I was the only one who thought movies in the past 3 years. I mean I havent been to movie theater since July 2004 seeing RE2. And that was because I had a free ticket. Before that, I saw Underworld in Sept 2003 in a movie theater. Movies these days suck and prices are getting higher. Easier and cheaper to rent them. Plus Hollywood is running out of ideas so they are doing remakes (Assault on Precinct 13), taking comic book heros (Daredevil, Elektra), and video games (Alone in the Dark, Tomb Raider, etc). And they are totally trash. Talk about raping our childhood... Edited February 11, 2005 by Godzilla Quote
Jolly Rogers Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 Movies are not getting lamer. The audience is getting more sophisticated. Most movies these days are made for the teenage demography. No surprise we old farts find them lame. Speaking of good movies from the last 3 years, I think the LOTR trilogy easily offsets all the crap we had to endure. Quote
Effect Posted February 12, 2005 Posted February 12, 2005 (edited) Torrent Site Crushed by MPAA (2005-02-11 18:17:48)LokiTorrent, a popular Bit Torrent website that carried anime and other media has been closed down by the MPAA. After promising to fight the MPAA and collecting $40,000 from users, the owner of LokiTorren eventually settled with the MPAA out of court and handed the server, with its logs, over to them. The MPAA says they may use the logs to sue users. LokiTorrent.com has been replaced with an MPAA warning regarding illegal downloading. Source: BroadbandReports That's what AnimeNewsNetwork has up on their site. If they have the logs, one wonders how far they go back. Also one would assume they'd go after heavy downloaders/seeders instead of simply everyone they found on the log, like those that might have use the site to download a few times. I know I've browsed the site a few times, just looking through what they had and not really finding anything of interest. I always stayed away from downloading films though. Stuck with fansubs of anime(never off of the big torrent sites) or old dreamcast and playstation games that haven't been sold in years(no money lost there). What makes me wonder though, I've seen Lokitorrent torrents listed on other sites a few times. How would that be handled? Edited February 12, 2005 by Effect Quote
Magnus Posted February 12, 2005 Author Posted February 12, 2005 Oh nice one - so he makes 40 grand and then shuts the site down and hands over all the user logs?? I never download movies myself, although I do grab TV shows that i've missed. I wonder, does the MPAA cover television as well, or only films? Quote
Zentrandude Posted February 12, 2005 Posted February 12, 2005 40k is nothing. most likey he used it up on the settlement. Quote
mikeszekely Posted February 12, 2005 Posted February 12, 2005 It makes you wonder if anyone out there running any of these corporations took any basic economics classes. I mean, doesn't anyone remember supply and demand? It used to be that if you wanted to maximize profits, you'd figure out how much it cost to produce, then how many you could sell at each price. You didn't sell the prodcuct for outrageously high prices (CDs, if I recall, only started to go down recently. They debuted around $15, then peaked at almost $20). You also didn't oversaturate the market, either (if I see another underage pop starlet/actress come out with another album, I swear I'm gonna puke). Nowadays, instead of finding that point where profits are maximized, it's almost like they want to cram subpar crap down our throats, charge us a premium for it, and sue us if we even contemplate trying to get it from an alternative source. They've already encrpytped movies on DVD, and started suing software manufactures who make software that can decrypt the DVD. They're suing file distributors on the internet. What's next? They sue Blockbuster for allowing people to borrow the few copies of a movie they paid for (and worse, for profiting from it)? Sue HBO for broadcasting the movies on TV? Start suing people who own TVs, and who have ever watched a movie on TV? I don't think this is really that file sharers are cheap. I'm not saying that downloading movies is right, but I think that it's about the value of a dollar. People have a limited ammount of money to spend on things like movies, and the sad fact is that too many of the big corporate movie makers want too much for too little. People just aren't willing to pay it. File sharing could totally come to an end, movies could be released on a new uncopyable format, and retal stores could go out of business, and I still don't think that the MPAA members are going to find that they're getting all that much more money. Quote
bsu legato Posted February 12, 2005 Posted February 12, 2005 It looks like they got tv-swarm.com too. Quote
azrael Posted February 12, 2005 Posted February 12, 2005 It looks like they got tv-swarm.com too. Or not. They might have gone down due to the run-off from Loki and had to take everything offline. Quote
Blaine23 Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 It's not like every moron's cousin on Earth doesn't have another 5000 torrent sites out there with the exact same crap. The funniest thing is... I never d/l movies. I hate watching pixellated, crappy sounding versions of multimillion dollar features. I'll stick to near-perfect audio CD rips, programs, TV shows that my TiVo for some reason missed, and tons and tons of pR0n. The MPAA don't got no beef with me... it's just every other copyright holder, really. Quote
Blaine23 Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 (edited) My bad. Don't post for a few months and you forget how, apparently. Edited February 13, 2005 by Blaine23 Quote
Oihan Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 (edited) I remember when they had these 300 (or was it 3000) law suits against individual people...as a means to scare others from d/l-ing s***. If anything, it just alienates me...I'm not scared from d/l-ing more s***. It just makes me want to d/l more! And you know something...despite losing however many millions (or billions of dollars)...I'm sure they're still making profit. ...A bunch of greedy farts if you ask me. Edit:Censorship is the devil! Edited February 13, 2005 by Oihan Quote
Gui Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 I'm sure they're still making profit. ...A bunch of greedy farts if you ask me. +1 The fact is that this industry found an easy and qucik way to make money onto the lack of discernment of the consumers: producing shitty films/CD/video games/whatever costs less and brings as much -or even more- money than quality stuff Now people have a way to give them back the difference and these poor guys whine that life's unfair? Lol: they're jesters who built their own prison, that's all Quote
justvinnie Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 While I don't download movies, I could see why people would. The past 5 times I've been to the movies, I left feeling like I wasted $19 (popcorn & drinks) with my dates. I don't go anymore. Everynow and then i will see something interesting, but then I'll just rent it (and some of those weren't even worth renting!). If they are "losing" mone, the studios need to make better movies. Until then, I'll just rent movies at my viewing pleasure... vinnie Quote
Duke Togo Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 If the movie industry is suffering like the music industry, its for the same reason: they are pushing crap on us that we don't like or want. Not only that, but they keeping insisting to us that this is what we like and want. And hey, am I the only one not duped by these "box office records" that seem to be broken every 5 minutes? They'll tell you, look, it made $400 million, when it cost $300 million to make! And on top of that, its with inflated ticket prices. In reality, when adjusting for ticket prices, "Gone With The Wind" is the top grossing movie of all time, followed by "Star Wars". None of these new movies have come close in ticket sales since Titanic. Quote
Max Jenius Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 The internet can't be stopped. With computers, there's a way around everything. Maybe if the film and music industry realized that their product isn't worth $30+ for a DVD and $15+ for a CD (both mediums costing less than $2 to produce) then it wouldn't be so bad. Quote
Noriko Takaya Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 (edited) Get out the pitchforks and molotov cocktails! We've got some burning and pillaging to do! Yeeeehhaaawww! Seriously, I'm glad for once I have a modem. You can't download doo doo on them things nowadays. (By the way, I don't have one because they don't provide service where I live, which is bum-fukked-egypt.) So I am safe. Edited February 13, 2005 by Noriko Takaya Quote
Oihan Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 (edited) I agree with Max...if they were to produce something worth paying $30+...I'd buy. I mean...who wouldn't support something they like? The way I figure it...if I want to see more of a certain product, I'll pour money into that product...otherwise F it. Edited February 13, 2005 by Oihan Quote
MSW Posted February 14, 2005 Posted February 14, 2005 I'm more then willing to pay $30 for a DVD...heck even just a music CD...no problem at all....and I'm on a modem, so downloading shows would be a week long event What I can't stand, and is largely why I'm seriously considering boycotting the DVD market...are these damn encripted DVDs...I've never burned a DVD, don't even have the foggiest idea how, nor do I have any desire to learn...but I would like to watch DVDs on my computer as well as on my stand alone player...but even the player is haveing a hard time with the latest DVDs Yeah it might only cost something like $2 to make a DVD...but If I just wanted a DVD, I would by a whole stack of blank ones...no, when I buy a DVD I really want the data, the movie, contained within...and am willing to pay $30+ for that...but I'm not willing to by that same DVD if it won't work... Hell I should kick Lucas in the groin for all the trouble the original trilogy DVDs have cost me...ain't even talking about the changes...I've gone through 4 different sets so far, and still haven't got one that doesn't occasionaly hickup on playback...damn non-refundable horse crap Now even the anime companies are getting in on this encryption thing Quote
mikeszekely Posted February 14, 2005 Posted February 14, 2005 While I don't download movies, I could see why people would. The past 5 times I've been to the movies, I left feeling like I wasted $19 (popcorn & drinks) with my dates. I don't go anymore. Everynow and then i will see something interesting, but then I'll just rent it (and some of those weren't even worth renting!). If they are "losing" mone, the studios need to make better movies. Until then, I'll just rent movies at my viewing pleasure...vinnie There is absolutely no way I'd ever consider buying anything to eat or drink at the theater. Again, it's a perfect example of businesses ignoring the law of supply and demand... they assume that, just because they forbid you to bring outside food or drinks into the theater, that they're forced the demand up to the point where they can charge as much as they want, instead of finding that nice point on the graph where profits are actually maximized. I mean, inisde the movie theater, a large drink is over $4. Outside, I could go to McDonald's and get value meal large-sized for $4. Inside the theater, bottled water is $3.25. Outside, I could get a case of bottled water for that price. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.