Titanium DL

[DainjaPowahs]

Hi guys,

After almost 3 years away, I got the EQ bug again but struggling to find titanium download that's legit, any advice on where to find would be awesome.

Cheers

[Swish]

Amazon if you want physical CDs.

Otherwise, ye be a landlubber if ye think ye can find genuine treasure here... har harrrr!

Find some dubloons at the Bay, ye salty seadog

[DainjaPowahs]

Bit pricey, is there any new options minus torrents?

[paulgiamatti]

Arrrrrrrr

[DainjaPowahs]

It looks like I be headed for the seas... Arrrrrrrr

[fastboy21]

Here's a riddle for you laddy!

What's a pirate's favorite letter of the alphabet???





NO! While its true we do love the AARRRR (R) our first love is da SEA (C)!

[Swish]

http://i.imgur.com/2bVHqBh.gif

[Thulack]

Bit pricey, is there any new options minus torrents?

nope

[nectarprime]

I don't understand why people are so against torrenting things that are legal distributed that way, like Titanium. If you are scared of a virus, you should get AV software.

[Ele]

I don't understand why people are so against torrenting things that are legal distributed that way, like Titanium. If you are scared of a virus, you should get AV software.

It's not like Verant/Sony/DGB is seeing any of that $200 you drop on craigslist/Amazon to the reseller.

People are silly.

[nectarprime]

I'm going to start burning copies and selling them for $50 on ebay

[Squabbles123]

I don't understand why people are so against torrenting things that are legal distributed that way, like Titanium. If you are scared of a virus, you should get AV software.

Can vouch that the most popular DL of this type on the high seas is legit and works just fine.

[paulgiamatti]

I don't understand why people are so against torrenting things that are legal distributed that way, like Titanium. If you are scared of a virus, you should get AV software.

It's still illegal to redistribute and download the Titanium client online - it's still intellectual property owned by Daybreak, it's just there is literally zero incentive for them to do anything about it. So I mean, don't post bay links here because it is entirely up to them whether Project 1999 is a thing or not. John Smedley and Russel Shanks are both gone, and we don't know anything about the new CEO - if he decides one day, "fuck this emulated elf sim server!" and sends a cease and desist letter, then that's a wrap folks. That very probably won't happen because he was co-president when they endorsed P99, but let's not (incoming pirate pun) test the waters.

[Tupakk]

It's still illegal to redistribute and download the Titanium client online - it's still intellectual property owned by Daybreak, it's just there is literally zero incentive for them to do anything about it. So I mean, don't post bay links here because it is entirely up to them whether Project 1999 is a thing or not. John Smedley and Russel Shanks are both gone, and we don't know anything about the new CEO - if he decides one day, "fuck this emulated elf sim server!" and sends a cease and desist letter, then that's a wrap folks. That very probably won't happen because he was co-president when they endorsed P99, but let's not (incoming pirate pun) test the waters.

[Baler]

P99 can't get shutdown because they don't use any of SoE or daybreaks code.
The emulator is 100% self made legitimate.
And seeing as how p99 does NOT distribute any copyrighted materials..
Well you get my point.

Also any information SoE and or Daybreak has accidentally leaked in the past or present (such as code) could be used in favor of the emu. Stating such things as it is grounds for the legitimacy of the emu.

[paulgiamatti]

P99 can't get shutdown because they don't use any of SoE or daybreaks code.

False - the EQEmu source is a direct port of live server code and an infringing use of their intellectual property. Fortunately, EQEmulator has always had a good relationship with SoE with some of their former developers involved in the project. So in the case of a cease and desist shutdown by Daybreak, there would be no defense - it would be just like Nostalrius. The use of their server code, regardless of how much they've altered it, is more than enough legal ground to shut down any emulated EQ server.

And seeing as how p99 does NOT distribute any copyrighted materials..

Also false - despite being very few in total, many of the files with each patch are copyrighted files that come with Titanium which include unaltered code originally written by SoE. I'm not trying to be alarmist or anything - there's absolutely no reason to think Daybreak would suddenly turn against longstanding EQEmu projects which predate their company, but it's important to understand that it is still illegal use of intellectual property, and if they chose to protect that intellectual property for any reason all it would take is one letter from one guy named Ji Ham.

[Swish]

False - the EQEmu source is a direct port of live server code and an infringing use of their intellectual property.

I don't see that. If you look at the state of the TLP servers there's nothing similar about the code at all.

Also the code isn't a replica of the code used during classic EQ, it's put together to be as similar as possible. The only similarities are the character models and zones, and even the zones in some respects have been changed.

It'd be a tangled web but I think ultimately P99 stands separate enough from anything the live servers are doing, using custom code based on a client that is ahead of the era we're playing in. A lot of us use addons that customize the experience further.

If P99 classic EQ was as popular as H1Z1 is for Daybreak I could see them wanting to trigger a shutdown, but it isn't...and if anything people who've played here might not have moved to try the TLP servers over the last 7-8 years.

If they wanted to cash in, they could give us a paid/legal version of Titanium we could download... right?

[paulgiamatti]

I don't see that. If you look at the state of the TLP servers there's nothing similar about the code at all.

That wouldn't matter in the case of a C&D shutdown, and that's true across all emulated servers, not just P99. I mean, do you think Nostalrius would still be up if they said, "Wait! Our servers aren't anything at all like the current WoW servers!" It wouldn't matter. It doesn't matter how similar or dissimilar EQEmu server code is from either the current EQ live code or EQ live code as it existed from '99-'02 - using the brand name alone would be enough legal ground to end any emulated EverQuest server. This wasn't true when SoE owned the IP due to some ambiguous verbiage in their end-user license agreement, which granted a license to "all account subscribers in good standing" to use any of the brand's content.

Also the code isn't a replica of the code used during classic EQ, it's put together to be as similar as possible.

Things get a bit complicated here, not that it changes anything legally, but the EQEmu source was originally a direct port from EQ live code, meaning they didn't start from scratch. They obtained an early version of EQ live server source code, changed it to their liking, and based their server software off that. So at some point the EQ server code was leaked and the founders of EQEmu took advantage of the opportunity - EQEmu has been around since as early as 2001, so this probably happened quite awhile ago.

The only similarities are the character models and zones, and even the zones in some respects have been changed.

All of that stuff is client-side though, so that wouldn't affect P99's legality so long as they don't encourage pirating the client software.

If P99 classic EQ was as popular as H1Z1 is for Daybreak I could see them wanting to trigger a shutdown, but it isn't...and if anything people who've played here might not have moved to try the TLP servers over the last 7-8 years.

If they wanted to cash in, they could give us a paid/legal version of Titanium we could download... right?

Yeah I mean, this is just a philosophical conversation at this point because, again, there is literally zero incentive for Daybreak to do anything. Winter's Roar was only shut down because the EverQuest brand was still generating some tangible amount of revenue. EverQuest isn't making Daybreak any money, so they have no reason to care about a few thousand nerds elf simming it up on P99 or anywhere else. Add onto that the fact that they've publicly endorsed P99, and the fact that they're no longer a subsidiary of the corporate giant Sony.

There's still value in protecting intellectual property though, even if there's a lawsuit (there wouldn't be) and it costs Daybreak money and earns them nothing - if you want your brands to retain value, you'll want people to take you seriously instead of just emulating free versions of whatever new games you release.

[Swish]

Some good points there. I will say though that it would be quite hypocritical of them to call out protecting intellectual property when they shit canned EQ Next not too long ago.

I'd still like to see the EQ franchise sold to a company that will take it forwards and preserve it, not sure who would keep developing for it though. The irony if Brad McQuaid's studio did :D

[mgellan]

Things get a bit complicated here, not that it changes anything legally, but the EQEmu source was originally a direct port from EQ live code, meaning they didn't start from scratch. They obtained an early version of EQ live server source code, changed it to their liking, and based their server software off that. So at some point the EQ server code was leaked and the founders of EQEmu took advantage of the opportunity - EQEmu has been around since as early as 2001, so this probably happened quite awhile ago.

Reference please? This is absolutely the first time I've ever heard this and it seems highly implausible versus just writing the code from scratch...

Regards,
Mg

[Tupakk]

There is a thread floating around with how the source code was ported from the original EQ. I'm sure Paul will dig it up.

But yes that's true. They didn't start from scratch but a good chunk is rebuilt to keep things as classic as possible because that code doesn't exist anymore.

[Hetjan]

Through personal experience in business.

Having legitimate legal grounds for filing a suit has nothing to do with the law.

If you cannot afford or do not have the stamina to defend yourself against legal action then compliance is the only path.

Small companies are shut down through legal extortion all the time. Legitimacy is irrelevant. Right and wrong have no place in the modern courtroom, especially as it relates to tech.

[Rogean]

paulgiamatti there's so much incorrect information and assumptions in your posts that I don't know where to begin, the biggest of which is your interpretation of contractual law.

Just stop.

[nectarprime]

lmao

[Ravager]

I think Rogean just C&D'd paul.

[mgellan]

paulgiamatti there's so much incorrect information and assumptions in your posts that I don't know where to begin, the biggest of which is your interpretation of contractual law.

Just stop.

BOOM. Thx Rogean.

Regards,
Mg

[paulgiamatti]

Reference please? This is absolutely the first time I've ever heard this and it seems highly implausible versus just writing the code from scratch...


I could very well be wrong about this, I just remember hearing that the author of EQEmu originally worked with live source code and its earliest versions were based around that. Probably not provable either way without quoting something solid from him - something like that would predate any of P99 developers' involvement in EQEmu anyway, so Rogean saying that that's impossible wouldn't exactly be scripture.

paulgiamatti there's so much incorrect information and assumptions in your posts that I don't know where to begin, the biggest of which is your interpretation of contractual law.

Why not make some corrections? I know a lot of people here tend to double-down and get aggressive when they're misinformed, but I don't really care about my pride in elf sim forumquest. I'd rather be corrected and take part in a discussion, which is why I make statements about things at the risk of being wrong. Totally fine conceding anything for the sake of learning.

I'm guessing you aren't too keen on the idea of Project 1999 no longer being protected by the outdated SoE EULA, though I don't understand why since the threat of a shutdown (which was never really a threat, I know) is at an all-time low. I'll survive conceding that point too if you know something about IP law that I don't. I'm trying to help you by saying posting Titanium torrent links is a bad idea, but if you guys don't care about that anymore then that'd definitely be useful to know. Suggesting that EQEmu servers are indeed beholden to the owners of that intellectual property really isn't incorrect information, even if that IP owner gives you their blessing. Companies change, and so does law - last I heard, Ji Ham is only "acting" president of Daybreak, so tomorrow it could be someone entirely different.

[paulgiamatti]

I might've been thinking about a different emu project w/r/t utilizing original source code - this is from the EQEmu GitHub (https://github.com/EQEmu/Server): "EQEmulator is a custom completely from-scratch open source server implementation for EverQuest built mostly on C++" - that's proof enough for me at least.

[SoekiWiz]

paulgiamatti there's so much incorrect information and assumptions in your posts that I don't know where to begin, the biggest of which is your interpretation of contractual law.

Just stop.

This made my day.

[paulgiamatti]

I know a lot of people here tend to double-down and get aggressive when they're misinformed

Oh, speak of the devil...

[maskedmelon]

I was going to add my shiny two cents, but upon further consideration find this thread unworthy.

I tend to agree with paulg though that it is not the best of ideas to promote software piracy in general and specifically with regard to a project you loves :3 Also,


pras Rogean ^^

[nectarprime]

I'm not sure if sharing this software even falls under most definitions of piracy. Piracy means you are taking from someone - but I cannot purchase this software from the IP owner even if I wanted to.

If anything it falls under the "abandonware" definition as this client has been completely abandoned by the owner and is not available for purchase, no support available etc

[Thulack]

It's still illegal to redistribute and download the Titanium client online - it's still intellectual property owned by Daybreak, it's just there is literally zero incentive for them to do anything about it. So I mean, don't post bay links here because it is entirely up to them whether Project 1999 is a thing or not. John Smedley and Russel Shanks are both gone, and we don't know anything about the new CEO - if he decides one day, "fuck this emulated elf sim server!" and sends a cease and desist letter, then that's a wrap folks. That very probably won't happen because he was co-president when they endorsed P99, but let's not (incoming pirate pun) test the waters.

If you bought EQ at any time you have the right to get digital copies of your purchase. So torrenting EQ if you have bought it in the past is not illegal.

[paulgiamatti]

I'd just call it redistributing intellectual property, and when done without consent it's illegal, despite being a victimless crime - and when only downloading and not redistributing, one that you'd have to be a masochist not to commit. I'd still call that piracy, just for simplicity's sake if anything. Maybe pseudo-piracy would suffice.

[paulgiamatti]

If you bought EQ at any time you have the right to get digital copies of your purchase. So torrenting EQ if you have bought it in the past is not illegal.

Also a good point that's often overlooked, although that still wouldn't grant a license to redistribute - just to reacquire.

[maskedmelon]

I'd just call it redistributing intellectual property, and when done without consent it's illegal, despite being a victimless crime that you'd have to be a masochist not to commit. I'd still call that piracy, just for simplicity's sake if anything. Maybe pseudo-piracy would suffice.

[skipdog]

P99 can't get shutdown because they don't use any of SoE or daybreaks code.

This is a silly statement. All it takes is a letter from daybreak to Rogean and then it's his decision whether he wants to deal with the legal hassle, no matter what the true legality really is.

Gonna guess shutting off server would probably be his best option... but maybe he would fight tooth and nail for it. Guess we'll never know until it actually happens.

[paulgiamatti]

Guess we'll never know until it actually happens.

It won't, and (trigger warning: incoming assumption) even Rogean would be smart enough not to get tangled up in a lawsuit with DBG and just pull the plug.

[Tupakk]

I could very well be wrong about this, I just remember hearing that the author of EQEmu originally worked with live source code and its earliest versions were based around that. Probably not provable either way without quoting something solid from him - something like that would predate any of P99 developers' involvement in EQEmu anyway, so Rogean saying that that's impossible wouldn't exactly be scripture.



Why not make some corrections? I know a lot of people here tend to double-down and get aggressive when they're misinformed, but I don't really care about my pride in elf sim forumquest. I'd rather be corrected and take part in a discussion, which is why I make statements about things at the risk of being wrong. Totally fine conceding anything for the sake of learning.

I'm guessing you aren't too keen on the idea of Project 1999 no longer being protected by the outdated SoE EULA, though I don't understand why since the threat of a shutdown (which was never really a threat, I know) is at an all-time low. I'll survive conceding that point too if you know something about IP law that I don't. I'm trying to help you by saying posting Titanium torrent links is a bad idea, but if you guys don't care about that anymore then that'd definitely be useful to know. Suggesting that EQEmu servers are indeed beholden to the owners of that intellectual property really isn't incorrect information, even if that IP owner gives you their blessing. Companies change, and so does law - last I heard, Ji Ham is only "acting" president of Daybreak, so tomorrow it could be someone entirely different.

I agree. We're having a conversation about it if you have better or more current info then shine some light.

[fastboy21]

I'd just call it redistributing intellectual property, and when done without consent it's illegal, despite being a victimless crime - and when only downloading and not redistributing, one that you'd have to be a masochist not to commit. I'd still call that piracy, just for simplicity's sake if anything. Maybe pseudo-piracy would suffice.

Not sure what you mean. If it's victimless then there is no theft. There has to be some damages, or it isn't anything.

This is a silly statement. All it takes is a letter from daybreak to Rogean and then it's his decision whether he wants to deal with the legal hassle, no matter what the true legality really is.

Gonna guess shutting off server would probably be his best option... but maybe he would fight tooth and nail for it. Guess we'll never know until it actually happens.

^^^ This.

The legality of most lawsuits hardly matters at all. Someone with a lot of money can bully someone if they want using lawsuits. Considering the nature of this server I can't really imagine Rogean being willing to invest the type of money it would cost him to deal with this. Its a free emulator server the risk v. reward would be hardly worth it unless he had someone backing him up.

[Haynar]

I have 3 copies of Titanium.

neener neener

[nectarprime]

I have 3 copies of Titanium.

neener neener

Actually we all have infinite copies.

[paulgiamatti]

Not sure what you mean. If it's victimless then there is no theft. There has to be some damages, or it isn't anything.

I never said it's theft, just that it's a crime according to the stipulations of copyright law. Copyright law is agnostic about whether intellectual property is still available through retail, meaning if it came to a lawsuit that wouldn't be a discriminating factor. Simplicity would apply: was copyrighted material acquired or redistributed illegally? If yes, a crime was committed.

I don't agree with that law, and I also suggest others ignore it because there are no real repercussions for breaking it. I'm merely suggesting that we probably don't want to turn the forums into a hotbed for torrenting the client, but apparently the owners of P99 are less concerned about that than I am.

[nyclin]

I have 3 copies of Titanium.

neener neener

i've got an iso file and a cd burner

checkmate

[Swish]

I never said it's theft, just that it's a crime according to the stipulations of copyright law. Copyright law is agnostic about whether intellectual property is still available through retail, meaning if it came to a lawsuit that wouldn't be a discriminating factor. Simplicity would apply: was copyrighted material acquired or redistributed illegally? If yes, a crime was committed.

I don't agree with that law, and I also suggest others ignore it because there are no real repercussions for breaking it. I'm merely suggesting that we probably don't want to turn the forums into a hotbed for torrenting the client, but apparently the owners of P99 are less concerned about that than I am.

How do you legally prove 1000s of people here have an illegal copy? Case by case?

[paulgiamatti]

How do you legally prove 1000s of people here have an illegal copy? Case by case?

Daybreak wouldn't need to prove that if they wanted to shut down P99.

[NegaStoat]

If you bought EQ at any time you have the right to get digital copies of your purchase. So torrenting EQ if you have bought it in the past is not illegal.

The thread should have died here, as the above is correct. You don't have to be in possession of your CD case or CD's (broken or not). A bank statement showing that you paid for a subscription during the time Titanium was being sold is sufficient. Also, my placing my legally protected digital copy in a manner that allows others to torrent it is not breaking the law - the responsibility falls squarely on those seeking to obtain their own legal digital copies of a previous purchase.

[paulgiamatti]

my placing my legally protected digital copy in a manner that allows others to torrent it is not breaking the law

Yes it is, that's the definition of unauthorized redistribution. Granted, you'll never actually be prosecuted for uploading & seeding torrents unless you're running a large-scale operation and costing some hawkish corporation a large amount of money, but even if you have a legally purchased copy of Titanium (or anything, for that matter), and you go and download a torrent of it, that would still constitute copyright infringement because when you torrent something you are by definition also sharing it. If you own a bunch of movies and you decide to go download them off the bay without hiding your IP address, sooner or later your ISP is going to get a C&D letter from a big movie company because while you were downloading those movies you were also redistributing them without authorization.

[fastboy21]

I never said it's theft, just that it's a crime according to the stipulations of copyright law. Copyright law is agnostic about whether intellectual property is still available through retail, meaning if it came to a lawsuit that wouldn't be a discriminating factor. Simplicity would apply: was copyrighted material acquired or redistributed illegally? If yes, a crime was committed.

I don't agree with that law, and I also suggest others ignore it because there are no real repercussions for breaking it. I'm merely suggesting that we probably don't want to turn the forums into a hotbed for torrenting the client, but apparently the owners of P99 are less concerned about that than I am.

Then it isn't victimless. You can't have it both ways in copyright law: either there is a victim or there is no crime. Wrapping pseudo-legal jargon around it doesn't change the essence of the issue at point.

Again, no clue what you mean when you say both of those things together. You seem to be arguing clearly on a particular side of the issue.

In any case, of more interest, why the sudden interest in illuminated the law on a server you've been playing on for years now...

[paulgiamatti]

Then it isn't victimless.

That's correct, but when I said it's a victimless crime I was being more aphoristic than literal. It's victimless in the sense that there is no direct immediate harm being done to the owner of that intellectual property, but one could argue that there is an indirect effect on the overall security of that company's copyright power.

You can't have it both ways in copyright law: either there is a victim or there is no crime.

Says who? That's like saying it's only illegal if you don't get caught. If you illegally possess and vape weed in your basement and there are literally zero victims, it's still illegal. Copyright law is no different - there is no absolute requirement for someone to be victimized in order for a crime to be committed.

Wrapping pseudo-legal jargon around it doesn't change the essence of the issue at point.

What are you talking about? Pseudo-legal jargon? You've completely lost me here.

Again, no clue what you mean when you say both of those things together. You seem to be arguing clearly on a particular side of the issue.

"Victimless crime" is pretty self-explanatory - it's a crime in which there are no victims. Crime does not require victimization. You seem to be conflating "crime" with "wrongdoing" - crime is contingent upon a man-made, flawed legal system. In some instances there are crimes you'd have to be a monster not to commit. Copyright laws only exist to protect the interests of companies and their intellectual property, not to prevent wrongdoing or victimization.

In any case, of more interest, why the sudden interest in illuminated the law on a server you've been playing on for years now...

You've answered your own question - for illumination and clarity's sake. It's not sudden, I've been clarifying this point about piracy for awhile. I realize now that there's probably some kind of contractual arrangement between Daybreak and P99, but a contract is just a band-aid to prevent the bleed-out of liability that normally exists otherwise. Time erodes that band-aid's adhesiveness and eventually it falls off, so there's still value in understanding the technicalities of the laws themselves even when there's a contract in place.

[fastboy21]

There are victimless crimes, but there is no such thing as victimless copyright violation. If there is no victim it can't be a copyright violation. It pretty simple.

[paulgiamatti]

Yes, I'll concede that point, but it won't stop me from saying pirating Titanium is a victimless crime because calling Daybreak a victim in that scenario is extremely hyperbolic. If it diminishes their copyright power at all then it's not enough for me to say they've been victimized.

[NegaStoat]

Yes it is, that's the definition of unauthorized redistribution. Granted, you'll never actually be prosecuted for uploading & seeding torrents unless you're running a large-scale operation and costing some hawkish corporation a large amount of money, but even if you have a legally purchased copy of Titanium (or anything, for that matter), and you go and download a torrent of it, that would still constitute copyright infringement because when you torrent something you are by definition also sharing it. If you own a bunch of movies and you decide to go download them off the bay without hiding your IP address, sooner or later your ISP is going to get a C&D letter from a big movie company because while you were downloading those movies you were also redistributing them without authorization.

All of what you described is valid in the case where software is neither discontinued or abandoned. No one on this planet can currently obtain a digital copy or original copy of the Everquest: Titanium edition of the game through Daybreak, the current holder of the copyright and franchise. The people who did purchase that edition of the game shall not have their right to a digital copy, protected by law, denied to them.

You can spin it as something bad, but the courts take an extremely dim view on anything amounting to trust / monopolies of media in any form and the consumer's rights.

[paulgiamatti]

All of what you described is valid in the case where software is neither discontinued or abandoned.

It's valid today too. Again, copyright law is agnostic about whether intellectual property is still available through retail, meaning if it came to a lawsuit that wouldn't be a discriminating factor. Simplicity would apply: was copyrighted material acquired or redistributed illegally? If yes, a crime was committed. Hosting and distributing copyrighted software without permission is illegal - it's still unlawful to redistribute copies of old copyrighted software and games, with or without compensation, in any Berne Convention signatory country.

No one on this planet can currently obtain a digital copy or original copy of the Everquest: Titanium edition of the game through Daybreak, the current holder of the copyright and franchise. The people who did purchase that edition of the game shall not have their right to a digital copy, protected by law, denied to them.

Which is why it isn't illegal for people who legally purchased it to download it off the internet. It's still illegal to torrent it off the internet, because torrenting means redistributing.

You can spin it as something bad, but the courts take an extremely dim view on anything amounting to trust / monopolies of media in any form and the consumer's rights.

I'm not spinning it as anything, I'm simply stating the facts about copyright law. I don't agree with these laws - I want them to change, and I'm a proponent for the legality of torrenting digital media, especially in the case that it's no longer available on the market. Current copyright law doesn't make sense because in many cases in order to legally reacquire media that you've purchased, someone has to illegally make it available to you. This could be easily fixed in the case of discontinued/abandoned software by updating the DMCA.

[nectarprime]

Are you not aware that you can download files from a torrent without uploading?

[paulgiamatti]

Yes, but leechers are still added to the swarm and in effect help facilitate downloading the torrent by pointing to other seeders. So people who upload nothing and people who upload 20 times what they've downloaded are equally guilty to whatever company decides to record IP addresses in that torrent's swarm.

[Rogean]

Why not make some corrections? I know a lot of people here tend to double-down and get aggressive when they're misinformed, but I don't really care about my pride in elf sim forumquest.

What you're suggesting is a pretty clear cut case of bait trolling. People who know they are wrong but spread false information around to get more people vocal about it and pressure us to reveal more than we normally would to 'set the record' straight. This kind of trolling is deliberate, it doesn't work here anymore, and frankly it's quite annoying.

So with that said I will not comment on your gross inaccurate assumptions regarding our legal status with Daybreak. I will clarify my original statement, where I commented on your misunderstanding of how contractual law works, by saying this: Contracts and legal agreements have breach clauses. This means that one side, regardless of any change in management personnel, cannot arbitrarily decide that they don't want to honor it anymore.

[paulgiamatti]

What you're suggesting is a pretty clear cut case of bait trolling. People who know they are wrong but spread false information around to get more people vocal about it and pressure us to reveal more than we normally would to 'set the record' straight. This kind of trolling is deliberate, it doesn't work here anymore, and frankly it's quite annoying.

When I make statements about things I am doing so to the best of my knowledge, knowing that while it might not be absolute truth (this is the case for every statement anyone makes about anything, ever), it also isn't knowingly wrong. I'm not trolling or attempting to extort information from you, but I don't really blame you for suspecting that because I have a tendency to be kind of a dick, though I generally have good reasons for being a dick. So instead of attacking me and attempting to shut down the conversation, which is what is happening in this thread, I'd have preferred you give me the benefit of the doubt and correct me in a way that doesn't reveal anything you don't want revealed. Instead you chose the grumpy, cantankerous server owner route - that's fine, I probably had it coming.

So with that said I will not comment on your gross inaccurate assumptions regarding our legal status with Daybreak.

And in turn I will not comment on your gross conversation-stifling assumptions regarding my intentions when I choose to discuss a completely valid topic like the legality of elf sim.

I will clarify my original statement, where I commented on your misunderstanding of how contractual law works, by saying this: Contracts and legal agreements have breach clauses. This means that one side, regardless of any change in management personnel, cannot arbitrarily decide that they don't want to honor it anymore.

See? That wasn't so hard, was it?

[nectarprime]

So people who upload nothing and people who upload 20 times what they've downloaded are equally guilty to whatever company decides to record IP addresses in that torrent's swarm.

Please point me towards a case where someone was found guilty of distributing copywritten material without actually distributing copywritten material.

[paulgiamatti]

*copyrighted

I'm not saying if you leech a torrent you'll be found guilty in a court of law, just that a cease and desist letter will still be sent. That letter won't be sent to you; it will go to your ISP, who has no idea if you were only downloading copyrighted material without authorization, or redistributing copyrighted material without authorization, both of which are illegal and the logical thing to assume. Since your ISP doesn't know if what you were doing was actually illegal per se, they send you an automatic response saying, "Hey, this IP company representing this huge corporation is on our ass because you're torrenting a bunch of shit - cut it out or we'll suspend your service." It is then up to you if you want contest the claims being made by the IP company, in the case that you had authorization to download said material and you weren't redistributing it. Even if you're innocent and you had authorization, you're still just going to find a way to hide your IP address instead of getting into a lawsuit with a company whose toilet paper is worth more than your life.

[JackFlash]

What you're suggesting is a pretty clear cut case of bait trolling. People who know they are wrong but spread false information around to get more people vocal about it and pressure us to reveal more than we normally would to 'set the record' straight. This kind of trolling is deliberate, it doesn't work here anymore, and frankly it's quite annoying.

So with that said I will not comment on your gross inaccurate assumptions regarding our legal status with Daybreak. I will clarify my original statement, where I commented on your misunderstanding of how contractual law works, by saying this: Contracts and legal agreements have breach clauses. This means that one side, regardless of any change in management personnel, cannot arbitrarily decide that they don't want to honor it anymore.

/lolthread

[nectarprime]

*copyrighted

I'm not saying if you leech a torrent you'll be found guilty in a court of law, just that a cease and desist letter will still be sent. That letter won't be sent to you; it will go to your ISP, who has no idea if you were only downloading copyrighted material without authorization, or redistributing copyrighted material without authorization, both of which are illegal and the logical thing to assume. Since your ISP doesn't know if what you were doing was actually illegal per se, they send you an automatic response saying, "Hey, this IP company representing this huge corporation is on our ass because you're torrenting a bunch of shit - cut it out or we'll suspend your service." It is then up to you if you want contest the claims being made by the IP company, in the case that you had authorization to download said material and you weren't redistributing it. Even if you're innocent and you had authorization, you're still just going to find a way to hide your IP address instead of getting into a lawsuit with a company whose toilet paper is worth more than your life.

It WILL be sent? Show me one cease and desist letter sent over the downloading of Titanium. And don't move the goalpoasts like you've been doing. Just answer the question.

[fastboy21]

*copyrighted

I'm not saying if you leech a torrent you'll be found guilty in a court of law, just that a cease and desist letter will still be sent. That letter won't be sent to you; it will go to your ISP, who has no idea if you were only downloading copyrighted material without authorization, or redistributing copyrighted material without authorization, both of which are illegal and the logical thing to assume. Since your ISP doesn't know if what you were doing was actually illegal per se, they send you an automatic response saying, "Hey, this IP company representing this huge corporation is on our ass because you're torrenting a bunch of shit - cut it out or we'll suspend your service." It is then up to you if you want contest the claims being made by the IP company, in the case that you had authorization to download said material and you weren't redistributing it. Even if you're innocent and you had authorization, you're still just going to find a way to hide your IP address instead of getting into a lawsuit with a company whose toilet paper is worth more than your life.

I'll respect you enough to assume you aren't intentionally spreading wrong information. Where are you getting your information from?

[paulgiamatti]

It WILL be sent?

Yes. In the case that you're leeching copyrighted media - which is what we've been talking about, not just Titanium specifically - your ISP is just as susceptible to cease and desist letters as it would be if you're seeding that copyrighted media. That was the initial point I was making, and it's still the point I'm making - I don't need to respond to your strawmanned "A CEASE AND DESIST LETTER WILL BE SENT 100% OF THE TIME?! LOL NO IT WON'T". That's not what I was arguing.

Show me one cease and desist letter sent over the downloading of Titanium. And don't move the goalpoasts like you've been doing. Just answer the question.

What? There isn't the slightest inkling throughout the entirety of this thread that I was ever saying you would get a cease and desist letter from downloading Titanium, legally or otherwise. If you can't follow the plot, please don't jump into the conversation.

[nectarprime]

Oh fuck off, don't try and act like you're smarter than anyone here. You just said that even if you leech copyrighted media you WILL get a C&D, and then in you very next post you say that you never said that. Then you try and put me down because you're talking yourself in circles and can't even keep your story straight.

Again, moving the goalposts when you're asked to prove your statements. Everyone here knows you're just tooting your own horn.

[paulgiamatti]

I'll respect you enough to assume you aren't intentionally spreading wrong information. Where are you getting your information from?

From having dealt with it firsthand, being the person whose name an internet subscription that was flagged for infringing activity was registered under. Something to keep in mind if you ever share your connection with family or roommates, etc. - they won't make a distinction between them and you, since all that matters is the name of the account holder.

[nectarprime]

From having dealt with it firsthand, being the person whose name an internet subscription that was flagged for infringing activity was registered under. Something to keep in mind if you ever share your connection with family or roommates, etc. - they won't make a distinction between them and you, since all that matters is the name of the account holder.

Literally everyone who has ever torrented a movie has gotten one of those, it doesn't matter and no one cares.

[paulgiamatti]

Oh fuck off, don't try and act like you're smarter than anyone here. You just said that even if you leech copyrighted media you WILL get a C&D, and then in you very next post you say that you never said that. Then you try and put me down because you're talking yourself in circles and can't even keep your story straight.

Again, moving the goalposts when you're asked to prove your statements. Everyone here knows you're just tooting your own horn.

Again, go read up on straw-manning someone's argument versus steel-manning someone's argument. I don't respond kindly to people who are obviously capable of knowing what I meant, yet latch onto insignificant details like the use of "will" instead of "can", which doesn't have anything to do with my overall point. That's how you construct a paltry, weaker version of someone's argument so that you can feel like you've won the debate when you topple it. It's not impressive.

[nectarprime]

You're a dumbass, everyone here knows your're a dumbass (including Rogean), nothing you type will change that lmao

[Geek.Verve]

I didn't realize there were so many attorneys in this community. :p

[Swish]

Literally everyone who has ever torrented a movie has gotten one of those, it doesn't matter and no one cares.

I've downloaded terabytes of movies, music and games and never had anything more than my connection minorly choked for torrenting. Not running any special programs or doing anything out of the ordinary in terms of trying not to get caught.

I also buy things, of course :)