Why are discussions on file sharing networks/clients not allowed?
From the Guidelines (at the top of this forum):
Because they are frequently used to circumvent copyright laws, something the SDMB in general and the Chicago Reader in particular are very adamant about.
Thanks Ice Wolf and Q.E.D. , I shouldn’t have skimmed through the terms.
The use of file sharing networks and programs are not illegal. Downloading and distributing copyright works are. However, file sharing programs (sans bittorent - which just downloads the file you already have the information for) are just search engines. There are several artists who want their work on peer to peer networks to get known (theBroken, RantTV, Red Vs. Blue, etc.). Not to mention a large number of un-copyrighted e-books/pdf documents, and hard to get demos. Many of these files are exclusive to peer to peer networks, and are legal to obtain.
Given this, why are discussions about these networks and programs not allowed, but a discussion on google is? What about FTP? GetRight?
I don’t mean to be pushy, really. I’m just curious.
Well, here’s the thing: P2P networks are specifically designed to allow searching for, and downloading of, files on a large scale. Google is a website search engine, which, although it may occassionaly find illegal content for you, is really geared towards finding websites, not specific files. FTP is the standard protocol for file transfers, but is strictly one computer to one computer. It’s a tool, with little worth, other than what it’s specifically designed to do–it can’t find files for you. GetRight is only a download manager., it doesn’t help you find files, it only helps you download them when you DO find them.
Good points. What about filemirrors?
Also, P2P will find whatever you want it to, most of the time. Same for google, most of the time. If it’s up to the user to decide whether or not they want to partake in any illegal activities, why not allow discussion? My legal file examples are still valid, aren’t they?
Forgot something… Google is a website search engine, yes. But again, it’s up to the user to decide what they want to use it for. Anyone could use google to easily find illegal files, and they do. But google can also be used to research some topic for the SDMB, for example.
If the means of finding something (files, websites, etc.) are legal (and they are), why not be able to discuss it? I’m not talking about turning the SDMB into an illegal file posting site - or even a legal posting site. What’s so criminal about answering questions like:
“What’s your favorite client?”
“How do I configure this?”
"What does this mean?
etc. if they ever arise in the general questions forum?
I think the main issue is that P2P is primarily used to illegally share files (let’s be honest), whereas Google is not. Besides, it’s a helluva lot harder to find, say, a given MP3 of a new hit song using Google, than it is using your average P2P network.
Additionally, I’m fairly confident that if a poster asked “How do I find <illegal content> using Google”, the administration would take a dim view of it. As in law, intent is everything.
You’re absolutely right in that regard, but should that really stop all discussion (besides morality) on the topic altogether?
I still think these are valid reasons not to prohibit discussion on it. I’m sure the mods would lock a thread with a question asking how to find illegal files on google, that wasn’t my point though. I’m comparing it to asking how to use the advanced search features on google, or how to change the preferences.
“As in law, intent is everything.” Again, you’re absolutely right. 
Sorry my reply took as long as it did; I was playing the Unreal Tournament 2004 Demo. I downloaded it on Bittorent and saved myself several hours. :rolleyes:
Maybe the admins/owners will look over this. I’m fighting ignorance, aren’t I?
I think it’s just a symptom of the lawer culture we live in. Just like crow bars* file sharing clients have perfectly valid uses. Certainly telling someone how to pry with them is okay. I can think of many files I have gotten off of p2p legally. However in theory I could get sued if I showed someone how to pry and they went used that to break into someone’s house. Same goes for file sharing. The only difference is file sharing is a new where as crow bars have been around quite abit longer and people are more comfortable with them.
Piecing togather what I have read by the various mods, it’s my guess that those in charge of the board just want to aviod any chance at legal troubles.
Ultimatly it’s the board’s call. It might be annoying to you as it sometimes is to me. However neither of us pays the server fees nor pay the lawers on the off chance they get sued.
I know the owner(s) are just trying to cover their bases, but
has nothing to do with answering valid questions about programs that are perfectly legal to use. You can not be held responsible for telling someone what <preference a> is on the SDMB, and they use that to download a Britney Spears song. There’s a big difference between telling a masked man with a crowbar standing near a window how to operate that crowbar than there is telling a doper what your favorite client is, or what ports to use. A crowbar is the best comparison I’ve heard, but it’s still an unfair one. If someone asks how to use the advanced features of google, and they use that, without our knowledge, to look at kiddie porn, are we liable? No.
Are there any good reasons not to allow discussion of this type on the SDMB? I’m very happy this message board is here. I’ve lurked for years before joining and read it everyday. I don’t pay for the board, and therefore should be grateful it’s here. I am, very.
But when I look at the slogan, and read these posts, it’s not good enough. When people can discuss how much of <material a> they need to build a bomb or how long it takes before a bomb becomes useless, I can’t help but think that something isn’t right about this filesharing policy. Does anyone agree with me?
If a mod or owner posts and tells me that regardless of the information in this thread, they will not change the guidelines, I’ll stop posting about this. Until then, I remain curious.
I agree with your reasoning, and I think you raise a very good point, but even if it were my board I would err on the side of caution. In this day and age, people are too sue-happy. (And if you remember, the bomb thread got closed once it had been answered as best as it could in GQ.)
Hey cityboy916. Two posts were actually closed, but most weren’t. Without going into threads about A-Bombs, these two weren’t.
Isn’t this policy going too far? Fear of being sued? Over what exactly? Nothing? Scary. No mesage boards with these type of discussions have been sued. The people being sued are those downloading and distributing copyrighted or illegal files.
Does the board that fights ignorance need to be worried about morons and their baseless law suits? Law suits that wont even pop up? Law suits that even if thought up will be dismissed by said person’s lawyer? Or thrown out of court by a judge? I know of several boards that answer these type of questions, and they haven’t been sued. Because they can’t. Nothing they’re doing is illegal. They don’t post about illegal material - because they don’t want to be sued. But talking about legal clients, and non-criminal discussions about them are fine in everyone’s eyes. Everyone but the ignorant, and they have no power.
So far.
Even a baseless law suit can cost the person/company being sued a lot of money. It would be ignorant not to acknowledge that. The SDMB uses a lot of the Reader’s resources and brings very little money. If the Reader was sued due to something on the SDMB, the management would almost certainly shut it down permanently.
(And as to bringing in money, that’s addressed in [post=1959053]this post in one of the FAQ threads[/post] and lots of other previous threads.)
Um, those were primarily about A-bombs. Any idiot with a PC can dowload, install and use a P2P client. On the other hand, no one can build an A-bomb without the resouces of a government behind him. The problem is getting the plutonium or enriched uranium. That’s the difference. Discussing A-bomb building is like discussing building a black hole. It ain’t gonna happen.
In our experience, discussions about file sharing programs and networks, even if they initally only discuss the legal ones, the discussion can very quickly turn to illegal programs and networks. Monitoring these discussions is very labor intensive, so it’s simply easier to disallow ALL discussion of this type.
If you are that eager to discuss such things, I advise you to go to one of the message boards that you say DOES allow such discussion, or open up a message board of your own.
Thanks, Lyn.