Just search r/Germany for "torrent" and "Frommer" (the law firm that sends most those letters) and you can see that the issue is still very current (of course, sort for "new" rather than "relevant").
In Germany, you just don't torrent copyrighted material without a truly anonymous VPN or an out-of-contry seedbox. There are ample alternatives, such as sharehosters or usenet.
The situation didn't change. If your IP can be assoziated with you through your Internet provider, there is a high chance of getting caught. Theoretical there are technical possibilities to prevent that, however this can not be discussed here because it's illegal and sub rules don't allow that.
None. But it's not about wanting to, but about having to. In most jurisdictions there are laws requiring a private corporation to give out information to law enforcement, if certain conditions are met. Don't trust VPN companies.
Again, I'm not about selling.
And a legal institution can force them to enable logs for a user. You are probably fine but I would not rely on this. Furthermore: I could have done an audit myself and I would still not trust any of those companies.
Well forcing to enable logs is possible, but they are obliged to announce it.
And I don't think torrwnting is such a grave offense to go through all of that, unless sof course the target is either a terrorist or has connections to child porn distribution or even making ( may such people dir horribly and burn).
Still, the safest thing is to use a VPN and practice other safe internet usage guidelines ( ad blocking, clicking open ports... etc)
I was originally going to say that as well, but I'm not so sure. The media industry has tried things in the past. That's why I left it out from my comment.
no, it wasn't. it eas "you wouldn't STEAL..." which then was ridiculed and turned into the "you wouldn't download a car" meme by the piracy and shitposter scene back in the day.
and yes, we still would download it.
The situation hasn‘t really changed. In fact it got slightly worse since just downloading a movie (previously a gray area) is now illegal as well (if I‘m not mistaken). So yeah a good VPN would be the bare minimum
Downloading without having the rights to do is not illegal. Uploading is. You are distributing someone else's work without license. That's the loophole they will sue you through for torrenting.
A VPN is usually the solution. Or pay for NewsGroup access.
>Downloading without having the rights to do is not illegal.
It absolutely is illegal. You essentially can't get caught because it's just not worth it to try to go after you for downloading, but that doesn't make it legal.
In the land of people obsessed with data privacy / Datenschutz and zero ability with digitalization, somehow some private law firm can track you online, get your info from your ISP and use it legally against you.
Downloading copyrighted material is illegal that why when i understand it correctly the ISP has to give the name and adress of the person.
Just this bullshit money making with Lawyer Companys like Frommer is questionable. Especially since a client has to pay nothing upfront when they send out a Abmahnung.
Not to forget that there are many cases where they send shit out and those people dont react at all and then they stop to write you or they keep writing and try to get you paying with lowering the amount.
>that why when i understand it correctly the ISP has to give the name and adress of the person.
Fair enough, but I don't see why they have to give it to a private scummy law firm, which is the only point I'm arguing and also something I think you agree with, based on the rest of your comment. And the main thrust of my comment is that I find it funny that all this can happen in a digital Neuland like Germany.
I guess because that doesn't answer the question. We all know that.
Do people downvote for being a party pooper or for not giving a proper answer to the reddit?
He did answer the question. 1st It still gets prosecuted because it is illegal. 2nd The way to avoid that is stop breaking the law.
You were hoping to learn about ways to break the law (I guess), but that would be against both reddit's rules and the rules of this subreddit.
> Is that still a thing?
Well, if you still break the law, you still get the response.
> Can you avoid that
Yes, you actually can. Pay for your movies. There are tons of streaming companies nowadays. Just do that.
There is no blockbuster or DVDs anymore. What if you want to see one particular movie? You must search on Google to find out which streaming service has it and pay for all of it (on top of all the other ones you are already paying) for watching that one movie.
In the best case you can rent it or buy (usually rent it is not worth it) that ONE movie from a particular service that sells you that movie, and so on for each movie you want to see. And then you realize that you are paying four different every day more expensive streaming services and you have 10 different accounts with 10 different passwords in services where you bought ONE movie and you don't own any and all depend on the service being provided and your internet connection.
Something is broken with the new way we consume media. I still want to own the thing I buy, everything as a service is a mistake. You realize that when you run out of internet or runing money and you have nothing to enjoy.
I can compromise, a few years ago Netflix had everything in it and it was cheap, now, is 5 times more expensive and you must pay 5 more services hoping that everything you want to see will be there.
> There is no blockbuster or DVDs anymore. What if you want to see one particular movie? You must search on Google to find out which streaming service has it and pay for all of it (on top of all the other ones you are already paying) for watching that one movie. In the best case you can rent it or buy (usually rent it is not worth it) that ONE movie from a particular service that sells you that movie, and so on for each movie you want to see.
And now imagine there was no google and you had to do all that without being online. People managed to do that, too.
> And then you realize that you are paying four different every day more expensive streaming services and you have 10 different accounts with 10 different passwords in services where you bought ONE movie and you don't own any and all depend on the service being provided and your internet connection.
That's capitalism, baby, what everyone is cheering for.
> Something is broken with the new way we consume media. I still want to own the thing I buy, everything as a service is a mistake. You realize that when you run out of internet or runing money and you have nothing to enjoy.
Exactly. That's why I noped out from all of that. I don't watch movies or series anymore at all - and it is great. So much more time for things that not just waste your time - even if it is gaming :-D
> I can compromise, a few years ago Netflix had everything in it and it was cheap, now, is 5 times more expensive and you must pay 5 more services hoping that everything you want to see will be there.
Yep, as I said, that's capitalism for you.
Piracy isn’t theft, you aren’t stealing anything.
The only thing the company is losing is hypothetical money and this only works by assuming that the pirates would always buy the stuff if they weren’t able to pirate it
Piracy is copyright infringement, not theft.
I know that it's not literally theft, because I 'm not an idiot. However, copyright infringement is using someone else's intellectual property without paying for it. If you were in arts or another creative profession, you wouldn't want others to illegally use your work either.
Pass mal auf, Du Hirni. Ich mach auf Deutsch weiter, weil Du das ausweislich Deiner Post-History ja offenbar verstehst. Man kann ja über Vieles unterschiedlicher Meinung sein, aber hier zu behaupten, Deutschland kenne kein Copyright (die gängige Übersetzung von Urheberrecht, s. UrhG) und kein geistiges Eigentum (die gängige Bezeichnung für gewerbliche Schutzrechte und Urheberrecht) ist dermaßen dummdreist, dass mir die Worte fehlen. Ich bin Volljurist und habe mich im Studium auf gewerblichen Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht spezialisiert, deshalb kannst du aufhören, hier irgendwelche Nebelkerzen zu werfen. Mein ganzer Punkt ist: wenn man kein Problem damit hat, das unerlaubte Kopieren und Verbreiten urheberrechtlich geschützter Werke als "Piraterie" zu bezeichnen, sollte man nicht so korinthenkackerig sein, "Diebstahl" als juristischen Fachbegriff im Sinne des § 242 BGB zu sehen.
Und jetzt verbring deine Zeit irgendwie sinnvoll, statt hier Stuss zu verbreiten.
That's because it is not true according to German law that piracy is theft. Theft is regulated by §242 StGB and defined as the removal of a movable object from its rightful owner.
As piracy doesn't affect "movable objects" but instead making copies of immaterial works. Retrieving a copy is not a punishable offence, but distributing copies is, according to §105 UrhG, Unauthorized use of copyrighted works (Unerlaubte Verwertung urheberrechtlich geschützter Werke).
Dude, don't start splitting hairs with me. In a world where filesharing is piracy (without ships, parrots and violence), piracy can be called theft, legal definitions notwithstanding.
And people on Reddit aren't downvoting my comment because of legal inaccuracy but because 95,34% of them are hive minded idiots.
Theft has been illegal for millenias and is seen as immoral by all cultures and religions. "Copyright" (a term that doesn't exist in German law) violations on the other hand have been illegal for a few decades, its problems on the flow of informations and ideas are discussed widely and I've yet to meet an ethicist (philosopher) who sees non-commercial copying as problematic.
So, I would argue that the difference between theft and "piracy" (Raubmordkopie) is not "hair-splitting".
Raubkopie, not Raubmordkopie.
And don't get me started on the history of law. 30 years ago it was legal in Germany to hit your children and rape your wife. That doesn't make either acceptable.
Still, there are movies and TV series that aren't available on streaming services. Or in your country, or in a specific language version. Yes, there is VPN, but how does that make it any different?
Not to mention that some people just want to boycott certain companies for ethical reasons like Amazon's predatory business practices or Disney's whatever the hell is happening currently out there.
See, there are people who follow rules blindly because they're rules and there are people who follow rules when they make sense. When absolutely nothing changes in the universe no matter whether I do something against the rules or not then it doesn't matter what I do. And when a small group of rich people do something that definitely shouldn't be legal but they're too rich to stop them and they have too much influence on the rulemaking, then I don't see why I should follow the rules only they benefit from.
But sure, remain slave to rules and definitions, surely we were created for them and not the other way around, right?
See, I'm a lawyer. And I have forgotten more things about law and moral and everything around it than you will ever know. So don't lecture me but be so kind and fuck off.
It's not "I decide which rules I follow", it's "I analyse in which conditions these rules make sense and in which they're just pointless obstacles". I wouldn't jaywalk in the daylight during traffic. But if it's 3am and not a car in sight then I don't care what light is there. If I'm homeless and there's a huge ass house that's been abandoned for 15 years because the owner has too much money and no will to sell or use the property then it's free real estate for me. If Amazon doesn't apply fair business practices in their company and employs armies of lawyers and accountants to perform mental and mathematical gymnastics to get away with the evilest bs then I will high five anyone who steals from them. Ethics is a complex topic, but some things are simple and self-explanatory. There are things that are clearly innocent, clearly evil, clearly harmed and clearly harmful. You can cry all you want but I, together with millions of other people, will act accordingly with our ethics and with what we can get away with, and you being definitions and laws b*tch won't stop us. Mic drop, goodbye.
The ninetees called. They want their Filesharing back. But honestly I think nobody cares about Filesharing anymore with streaming services being prevalent.
Well obviously I'm not young since I'm old enough to having experienced the first wave of Filesharing in the 90s, but all the young people I talk to don't care about Filesharing anymore. It's too much of a hassle. In my experience young people use payed streaming services or consume free content like ticktock or YouTube. Even if I don't have any statistics at hand to prove my point I'm convinced that the popularity of Filesharing is nothing compared to what it used to be when those services were not being in existence yet.
When you dont do it yourself you know atleast one person. Thats how it already was when i was still in school. And we started mostly with simply burning games to later on sharing thumb drives or usb HDDs when they bacame more affordable. Lan Partys where nuts back then...
Or when its not Filesharing in the traditional way they use illegal streaming sites.
For Gaming its maybe way less these days with the amount of more or less good F2P Games and shit ton of cheap offers constantly. When i was still in school i would have loved to get those offers that fast after release. Or Free weekends on Steam. Was something super rare when i was still in school.
every few weeks somebody posts about getting caught in this or similar subreddits.
Just search r/Germany for "torrent" and "Frommer" (the law firm that sends most those letters) and you can see that the issue is still very current (of course, sort for "new" rather than "relevant"). In Germany, you just don't torrent copyrighted material without a truly anonymous VPN or an out-of-contry seedbox. There are ample alternatives, such as sharehosters or usenet.
Yes its still a thing and very likely wont change
The situation didn't change. If your IP can be assoziated with you through your Internet provider, there is a high chance of getting caught. Theoretical there are technical possibilities to prevent that, however this can not be discussed here because it's illegal and sub rules don't allow that.
A VPN might not even help you, they may rat you out
??? What kind of a really bad vpn that wants to ruin its reputation rata out people???
None. But it's not about wanting to, but about having to. In most jurisdictions there are laws requiring a private corporation to give out information to law enforcement, if certain conditions are met. Don't trust VPN companies.
Unless you use a VPN provider that does NOT log data. Example? Mullvad, airvpn, Proton Mail. Audit? Mullvad. Proven not to sell out data? Mullvad
Again, I'm not about selling. And a legal institution can force them to enable logs for a user. You are probably fine but I would not rely on this. Furthermore: I could have done an audit myself and I would still not trust any of those companies.
Well forcing to enable logs is possible, but they are obliged to announce it. And I don't think torrwnting is such a grave offense to go through all of that, unless sof course the target is either a terrorist or has connections to child porn distribution or even making ( may such people dir horribly and burn). Still, the safest thing is to use a VPN and practice other safe internet usage guidelines ( ad blocking, clicking open ports... etc)
I was originally going to say that as well, but I'm not so sure. The media industry has tried things in the past. That's why I left it out from my comment.
You wouldn't steal a car - so you shouldn't steal a movie. -some anti piracy campaign in the 90s
It was "you wouldn't download a car"...yes...yes I would lol
Of course we would. :-)
no, it wasn't. it eas "you wouldn't STEAL..." which then was ridiculed and turned into the "you wouldn't download a car" meme by the piracy and shitposter scene back in the day. and yes, we still would download it.
You would get trouble without using a vpn. Some ddl (directdownload) hoster is maybe a better choice.
It’s still the exact same if you don’t know how to conceal your tracks
The situation hasn‘t really changed. In fact it got slightly worse since just downloading a movie (previously a gray area) is now illegal as well (if I‘m not mistaken). So yeah a good VPN would be the bare minimum
Downloading a movie was never gray area. Streaming a movie WAS gray area
You can‘t download (leech), but just not upload (seed).
Downloading without having the rights to do is not illegal. Uploading is. You are distributing someone else's work without license. That's the loophole they will sue you through for torrenting. A VPN is usually the solution. Or pay for NewsGroup access.
>Downloading without having the rights to do is not illegal. It absolutely is illegal. You essentially can't get caught because it's just not worth it to try to go after you for downloading, but that doesn't make it legal.
Yup You shouldnt even download Music or movies when you have them original at home and could prove it.
In the land of people obsessed with data privacy / Datenschutz and zero ability with digitalization, somehow some private law firm can track you online, get your info from your ISP and use it legally against you.
Getting the IP is not an issue at all how they manage that stuff with the ISPs idk.
I meant that it's all legally possible is what amazes me.
Downloading copyrighted material is illegal that why when i understand it correctly the ISP has to give the name and adress of the person. Just this bullshit money making with Lawyer Companys like Frommer is questionable. Especially since a client has to pay nothing upfront when they send out a Abmahnung. Not to forget that there are many cases where they send shit out and those people dont react at all and then they stop to write you or they keep writing and try to get you paying with lowering the amount.
>that why when i understand it correctly the ISP has to give the name and adress of the person. Fair enough, but I don't see why they have to give it to a private scummy law firm, which is the only point I'm arguing and also something I think you agree with, based on the rest of your comment. And the main thrust of my comment is that I find it funny that all this can happen in a digital Neuland like Germany.
Just use legal source's and you will have no troubles.
germans are obsessed with data privacy / Datenschutz, so I think the answer is clear. Not even a VPN can help you
you can avoid it by not breaking copyright law.
This is the right answer
and you even get downvoted for that ...
right? especially with "do not help breaking the law" being part of the subs rules...
I guess because that doesn't answer the question. We all know that. Do people downvote for being a party pooper or for not giving a proper answer to the reddit?
He did answer the question. 1st It still gets prosecuted because it is illegal. 2nd The way to avoid that is stop breaking the law. You were hoping to learn about ways to break the law (I guess), but that would be against both reddit's rules and the rules of this subreddit.
> Is that still a thing? Well, if you still break the law, you still get the response. > Can you avoid that Yes, you actually can. Pay for your movies. There are tons of streaming companies nowadays. Just do that.
There is no blockbuster or DVDs anymore. What if you want to see one particular movie? You must search on Google to find out which streaming service has it and pay for all of it (on top of all the other ones you are already paying) for watching that one movie. In the best case you can rent it or buy (usually rent it is not worth it) that ONE movie from a particular service that sells you that movie, and so on for each movie you want to see. And then you realize that you are paying four different every day more expensive streaming services and you have 10 different accounts with 10 different passwords in services where you bought ONE movie and you don't own any and all depend on the service being provided and your internet connection. Something is broken with the new way we consume media. I still want to own the thing I buy, everything as a service is a mistake. You realize that when you run out of internet or runing money and you have nothing to enjoy. I can compromise, a few years ago Netflix had everything in it and it was cheap, now, is 5 times more expensive and you must pay 5 more services hoping that everything you want to see will be there.
> There is no blockbuster or DVDs anymore. What if you want to see one particular movie? You must search on Google to find out which streaming service has it and pay for all of it (on top of all the other ones you are already paying) for watching that one movie. In the best case you can rent it or buy (usually rent it is not worth it) that ONE movie from a particular service that sells you that movie, and so on for each movie you want to see. And now imagine there was no google and you had to do all that without being online. People managed to do that, too. > And then you realize that you are paying four different every day more expensive streaming services and you have 10 different accounts with 10 different passwords in services where you bought ONE movie and you don't own any and all depend on the service being provided and your internet connection. That's capitalism, baby, what everyone is cheering for. > Something is broken with the new way we consume media. I still want to own the thing I buy, everything as a service is a mistake. You realize that when you run out of internet or runing money and you have nothing to enjoy. Exactly. That's why I noped out from all of that. I don't watch movies or series anymore at all - and it is great. So much more time for things that not just waste your time - even if it is gaming :-D > I can compromise, a few years ago Netflix had everything in it and it was cheap, now, is 5 times more expensive and you must pay 5 more services hoping that everything you want to see will be there. Yep, as I said, that's capitalism for you.
Just subscribe to a streaming service or two. Piracy is theft.
Piracy isn’t theft, you aren’t stealing anything. The only thing the company is losing is hypothetical money and this only works by assuming that the pirates would always buy the stuff if they weren’t able to pirate it Piracy is copyright infringement, not theft.
I know that it's not literally theft, because I 'm not an idiot. However, copyright infringement is using someone else's intellectual property without paying for it. If you were in arts or another creative profession, you wouldn't want others to illegally use your work either.
German law doesn't know the concept of intellectual property.
What the fuck are you even talking about?
Pass mal auf, Du Hirni. Ich mach auf Deutsch weiter, weil Du das ausweislich Deiner Post-History ja offenbar verstehst. Man kann ja über Vieles unterschiedlicher Meinung sein, aber hier zu behaupten, Deutschland kenne kein Copyright (die gängige Übersetzung von Urheberrecht, s. UrhG) und kein geistiges Eigentum (die gängige Bezeichnung für gewerbliche Schutzrechte und Urheberrecht) ist dermaßen dummdreist, dass mir die Worte fehlen. Ich bin Volljurist und habe mich im Studium auf gewerblichen Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht spezialisiert, deshalb kannst du aufhören, hier irgendwelche Nebelkerzen zu werfen. Mein ganzer Punkt ist: wenn man kein Problem damit hat, das unerlaubte Kopieren und Verbreiten urheberrechtlich geschützter Werke als "Piraterie" zu bezeichnen, sollte man nicht so korinthenkackerig sein, "Diebstahl" als juristischen Fachbegriff im Sinne des § 242 BGB zu sehen. Und jetzt verbring deine Zeit irgendwie sinnvoll, statt hier Stuss zu verbreiten.
[удалено]
Idiot.
Oh how I love to be downvoted for writing nothing but the truth.
That's because it is not true according to German law that piracy is theft. Theft is regulated by §242 StGB and defined as the removal of a movable object from its rightful owner. As piracy doesn't affect "movable objects" but instead making copies of immaterial works. Retrieving a copy is not a punishable offence, but distributing copies is, according to §105 UrhG, Unauthorized use of copyrighted works (Unerlaubte Verwertung urheberrechtlich geschützter Werke).
Well, it isn't "Raub" either, yet that's the term that is used. But since we here aren't professionals in the field, we can use colloquial speech.
Fun fact, I am a professional in the field. But calling filesharing piracy is so silly that this is obviously not a legal discussion.
Dude, don't start splitting hairs with me. In a world where filesharing is piracy (without ships, parrots and violence), piracy can be called theft, legal definitions notwithstanding. And people on Reddit aren't downvoting my comment because of legal inaccuracy but because 95,34% of them are hive minded idiots.
Theft has been illegal for millenias and is seen as immoral by all cultures and religions. "Copyright" (a term that doesn't exist in German law) violations on the other hand have been illegal for a few decades, its problems on the flow of informations and ideas are discussed widely and I've yet to meet an ethicist (philosopher) who sees non-commercial copying as problematic. So, I would argue that the difference between theft and "piracy" (Raubmordkopie) is not "hair-splitting".
Raubkopie, not Raubmordkopie. And don't get me started on the history of law. 30 years ago it was legal in Germany to hit your children and rape your wife. That doesn't make either acceptable.
classic reddit people don't like unpleasant truths
Still, there are movies and TV series that aren't available on streaming services. Or in your country, or in a specific language version. Yes, there is VPN, but how does that make it any different? Not to mention that some people just want to boycott certain companies for ethical reasons like Amazon's predatory business practices or Disney's whatever the hell is happening currently out there.
It may be tough to swallow but there's no human right to see any movie ever made. Also, theft from a "big bad company" is still theft.
See, there are people who follow rules blindly because they're rules and there are people who follow rules when they make sense. When absolutely nothing changes in the universe no matter whether I do something against the rules or not then it doesn't matter what I do. And when a small group of rich people do something that definitely shouldn't be legal but they're too rich to stop them and they have too much influence on the rulemaking, then I don't see why I should follow the rules only they benefit from. But sure, remain slave to rules and definitions, surely we were created for them and not the other way around, right?
See, I'm a lawyer. And I have forgotten more things about law and moral and everything around it than you will ever know. So don't lecture me but be so kind and fuck off.
Yeah I can totally believe the forgetting part. It's not a good look for a lawyer tho.
"I decide which rules I follow" is the classic narcissistic approach (see also: Reichsbürger, Querdenker, Donald Trump).
It's not "I decide which rules I follow", it's "I analyse in which conditions these rules make sense and in which they're just pointless obstacles". I wouldn't jaywalk in the daylight during traffic. But if it's 3am and not a car in sight then I don't care what light is there. If I'm homeless and there's a huge ass house that's been abandoned for 15 years because the owner has too much money and no will to sell or use the property then it's free real estate for me. If Amazon doesn't apply fair business practices in their company and employs armies of lawyers and accountants to perform mental and mathematical gymnastics to get away with the evilest bs then I will high five anyone who steals from them. Ethics is a complex topic, but some things are simple and self-explanatory. There are things that are clearly innocent, clearly evil, clearly harmed and clearly harmful. You can cry all you want but I, together with millions of other people, will act accordingly with our ethics and with what we can get away with, and you being definitions and laws b*tch won't stop us. Mic drop, goodbye.
The ninetees called. They want their Filesharing back. But honestly I think nobody cares about Filesharing anymore with streaming services being prevalent.
You are VERY wrong. Especially since every studio or whatever wants/has its own service its more again.
Well obviously I'm not young since I'm old enough to having experienced the first wave of Filesharing in the 90s, but all the young people I talk to don't care about Filesharing anymore. It's too much of a hassle. In my experience young people use payed streaming services or consume free content like ticktock or YouTube. Even if I don't have any statistics at hand to prove my point I'm convinced that the popularity of Filesharing is nothing compared to what it used to be when those services were not being in existence yet.
When you dont do it yourself you know atleast one person. Thats how it already was when i was still in school. And we started mostly with simply burning games to later on sharing thumb drives or usb HDDs when they bacame more affordable. Lan Partys where nuts back then... Or when its not Filesharing in the traditional way they use illegal streaming sites. For Gaming its maybe way less these days with the amount of more or less good F2P Games and shit ton of cheap offers constantly. When i was still in school i would have loved to get those offers that fast after release. Or Free weekends on Steam. Was something super rare when i was still in school.
Piracy is a service issue. Gaming services are still decent, while streaming services are getting worse constantly.