Elliott Back's Blog - Latest Comments in ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

jaxx — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 23:36:18 -0000

ok ... first of all..

INFORMATION SHOULD NOT BE SOLD..
EVERYTHING THAT CAN BE COPIED SHOULD NOT BE SOLD..
YOU CANNOT TRADE ENERGY FOR INFORMATION AND MONEY IS ENERGY

ok now that I got that off my mind.. mpaa is OWNED by the jews as is the ENTIRE MOTION PICTURE INDUSTRY so.. dont be fooled.. and dont let them tell you otherwise.. just see for yourself http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-controlledpress-6-j...

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

laff — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 14:15:13 -0000

Anyone that rationalizes copyright infringement as acceptable is a fool. It's like arguing that it's legal for Robin Hood to steal from the rich and give to the poor. It's still illegal. Thank you.

(next thing I'm going to hear people argue that it's okay to cheat on their taxes because they need the money for rent)

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

digitalbowser — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 14:20:54 -0000

what country are you in that does not fall under the mpaa? canada? if so does canada not have some one to send out
or is everything in canada like there army

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Just passing — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 02:33:25 -0000

Update, Jan. 16, 2007
Lawyers from our primary ISP decided to pull our plug without any advance notice, as of 14:45 PST. No doubt related to our lawsuit brought by the MPAA, but we don't have more information at this time until people responsible comes to work tomorrow. We will be back in operation once we sort out this mess with our current ISP, or we get new hardware ready at our new ISP.

Sit back and enjoy the rest of the internet in the mean time, while it last. For your torrent searching needs, try Google for now by searching for "SEARCH TERMS ext:torrent".

You can also come hang around our IRC channel (SSL on port +7000). We'll update on this page and on IRC when we have more information.

If you wish to help us out financially, you can donate via Paypal from the button below. Due to prior dis-taste from certain individuals misusing legal funds for their own purposes however, this is not a legal defense fund. Your donations will be used for the operational costs of our servers and development of our websites. You have our sincere thanks.

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Praetorian — Tue, 16 Jan 2007 23:34:35 -0000

Oh ... and be good to ya mother ... :)

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Praetorian — Tue, 16 Jan 2007 23:32:39 -0000

Fuck the MPAA, the RIAA and anyone else that attempts to attack the people.

Between 75% and 85% of all music, cinema and TV is absolute stinking shit. It should be flushed down the toilet of bad history never to rear it's ugly head. The 15% to 25% of good to superb of the above deserves some sort of praise.

Example. I've been a torrent-hound for years. I've downloaded so much shit that my PC fucking died once from torrent-intoxication. The fucking thing was drunk on torrents. I killed my PC. However, I'm one that can say that when I download something that is, in my opinion, true art, like say The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, I will actually go out and buy the extended box set, which yes, is sitting proudly in my loungeroom. It cost a fucking fortune but you know what, fuck it! That's my way of saying thanks to Peter Jackson and all the actors and contributors to that Trilogy for giving me hours and entertainment and food for my imagination.

When people start getting serious about making good music, cinema and TV, then I'll "consider" uninstalling Bit Torrent and Bit Comet.

Until then, get fucked!

Long Live ISOHUNT.com, Long Live the Information Revolution

:)

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

toastman — Mon, 18 Dec 2006 20:28:55 -0000

the technology to download copyrighted material has been around for 25 years now and i don't see any starving artists walking the streets yet! Are we to believe that mel gibson is hurting from people dl'ing passion of the christ???Half a billion and counting ...How much money do the producers of films need exactly??? Maybe if it didn't cost me $100 to take my famliy to the theatre i would feel sympathy but the fact remains that the large corporations have gouged the consumer for the last 50 years and now it is thier turn to Be gouged,I say how do you like it???? We also forget that 80% of the world population does not have telephones or internet so they are still forced to be at the mercy of corporate giants like sony. Besides how many times have music companies and movie producers been sued themselves for copyright infringement for stealing other peoples ideas or art????? Who is calling the kettle black now????

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Balls — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 15:59:08 -0000

I feel that the mpaa is just trying to finally block all the bootlegged movies out there, even though we have been bootlegging movies since Colecovision was out. I say that Isohunt should fight it out. the mpaa is bitching about why isohunt doesn't block its movies, when isohunt doesn't have a complete list to block off certain titles that my or may not yet be available for transfer. As far as I see it Isohunt has been complying, its the mpaa that doesn't want to move it's lazy ass to get a thourough list of its titles. They simply don't want to go through the trouble...or they don't feel obligated to do it. Personally, I say that they deserve to have their movies bootlegged...if they don't want to cooperate with Isohunt, then it is just for their precious movies to be transferred to a million homes and then be burned on 10 million dvd-r's.

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Brian — Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:26:02 -0000

The one thing people are missing about musical artists is that they don't get paid to make CDs. When a band signs a record deal the record company lends the band the money required to make the album. This money is paid back by profits from the CDs. Sometimes it can take releasing numerous albums to even pay off the first album. With actors, say Tom Cruise, he gets paid to make a movie, up front. Of course, the big pay out can be when artists get more coverage from the internet and people actually go see them live (unless of course they download the bootleg instead).

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Graham — Thu, 10 Aug 2006 02:26:42 -0000

LONG LIVE THE TORRENT COMMUNITY.

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Graham — Thu, 10 Aug 2006 02:18:04 -0000

when people employ the try and buy method then people start to spend money on content that they have deemed worthy instead of spending it on garbage the MPAA AND THE RIAA have deemed worthy. alot of new music has failed to hold the attention of anyone because of the poor quality of the talent opf the artist. the same goes for the movie industry . most of the msuic we all know and love from before the turn of 2000 has been overpriced on ebay and hard to find at any store. the only other source is P2P keeping alive the music that would be oh so hard to find otherwise. The MPAA AND THE RIAA are threatened by this because they make no money on artists that no longer produce music so the downloading of said music leads to something unprofitable to the MPAA AND RIAA because the artist has almost already been paid triple for their music due to the fact that P2P did not exist before 1995. movies are a different story because of the vast availability of them in rent out stores and stores such as futureshop. all in all P2P barely dents the economy of media where as the MPAA AND THE RIAA make it out as if 2 thirds the worlds populations steal everyones music. share for one share for all

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Graham — Thu, 10 Aug 2006 02:04:58 -0000

I think a lot of you have misconceptions on what is what when it comes to P2P filesharing so I will cut to the chase.

Facts: Downloading music is illegal in an ethical sense not in a fiscal sense. Ethically downloading music is stealing from the artist because in essence you have not given anything to the specified artist to recieve what said artist has produced for the general public. A pack of twenty blank CD's costs on average twenty one canadian dollars so per blank CD is one canadian dollar and five cents. HOWEVER mass produced shipments to american recording companies costs on average one hundred and 50 canadian dollars for upwards of fivehundred blank CD's so as you can see the cost dramatically drops to one penny. When an artist goes platinum he has sold one million full length albums. So if the entire P2P community (estimated of upwards of 100million worldwide users) were to download a platinum album with every song on it then the amount of money lost from the recording industry is one hundred thousand USD. That seems rather high but this is merely the cost lost from the purchase of the CD . The selling price for most full length albums is twenty two USD. that is a profit of twenty one dollars and ninety nine cents USD. then there are subsequent costs the artist must pay to the recording industry, company , engineers whom produced the album, and obviously in todays age of musicians their clearly underpaid lyricist. This takes that $21.99 profit for the artist to a guesstimated profit to the artist of 5.99. So again lets look at the greatly exaggerated figure 100 million worldwide downloaders download one artists album simultaneously would eliminate the artists profit of 500.99 million USD to the amount of zero USD. of course this figure hasnt taken into consideration of the population of the world that purchase the album which restores the artists profit to 100 million dollars. This is a grossly overinflated figure due to the assumption that half of the US has downloaded the song illegally and that half the US has downloaded the song legally, along with the other millions of people who buy or download the song on the planet. if there were 100 million people on the planet who all downloaded the music then the artist would never profit but the population of the planet far exceeds the mere 100 million downloaders.
A great ally to artists is the try and buy method; out of every5 people i have asked i found that 3 out of the 5 downloaded music to test it out before buying deleting it from their computer after. Though i only talked to 50 people that means that 30 of those people who downloaded the music also bought the same music they downloaded. so lets also apply this new figure to figure one . this reduces the 100 million users to 300000 users who download but dont buy afterwards. that means they steal a MINUTE amount of 30000 dollars USD from the cost to purchase CD's and even more astounding is that under 1 million dollars USD is stolent from artists. even after adding together bost costs it still fails to reach the million dollar USD mark. where as the profit just got a multiplication of 700000 users who download to try and then buy. Impressive for the artist EVEN IF that one million was stolen from me i wouldnt complain because i was still attracting 100.7 people to buy my music.

The amount of content available VIA bittorrent search engines is nearly ENDLESS. some of the hardest to find content is easily downloaded at the click of a button, even unreleased tracks that the artist had no intention of selling are on some of the websites. On multiple occasions before i downloaded some of the content i wanted i Googled it to see if perhaps i could find it on Ebay or amazon, only to discover that on the wonderful world wide web you can not purchase some content and that it is only available via P2P. Well that raises a host of questions such as. if i cant buy it how did it end up on a P2P server?. Insiders often make available content that can not be purchased on P2P servers. A blatant case of this insiderism is the availability of MICROSOFT OFFICE PROFESSIONAL EDITION 2007 BETA VERSION 2. it clearly isn purchasable yet is readily available on several P2P sites. Music that is rare is readily available such as Metric an underground Rock group whose albums are as rare as Osama Bin Laden sitings. On top of all this over priced programs are readily available from people who simply rip their origional CD's to a torrent file. In fact with all the P2P services available as of now Almost ANY music that you could possibly desire is only a button click away. some of the hardest to find files legally are nothing more than a few keyword searches clicks and patience. it is estimated that over two thirds of all the music is indexed on P2P servers. If these such servers were to cease in existence thousands of unfindable material would be erased from history.

THE BIGGEST REASON THAT THE MPAA AND THE RIAA are on the offensive against P2P is that the public has found a better way to distribute anything imaginable faster than any single one of the bigwigs in corporate america. In fact the MPAA AND RIAA have taken this as a personal hit on their integrity and intelligence. How in the world would the MPAA be able to exist if every single person in the world could produce edit and distribute their productions for nothing on the internet. It is simply cost ineffective to allow the public to have their own personal distribution method that is not government controlled nor corporate controlled. The MPAA is threatened and defending themselves with the full weight of the USA government however they are violationg freespeech and privacy with these inscessent claims of feveraged suing of any one or thing in their path. THE MPAA AND THE RIAA are only corrupt government institutions that have had their time but are now becoming increasingly unneeded. With this new system of distribution the corporations should be rejoicing at this incredible method however as most outdated institutions do they do as well which is attack the infiltrator of their turf. In a sense you can simplify this entire legal battle between two outdated us institutions who can't handle not being the only ones on the block. It is time to fight fro freedom and internet privacy and a REWORKED COPYRIGHT SYSTEM. what ever happened to producing music because you want to. why should the world be forced by one countries perogatives and laws to purchase overpriced subpar content from movie producers and musicians. avergae CD prices are around 21.99 USD average DVD prices are 42.99 USD average video games PC and Console are 70.99 USD microsofts overdue subpar programs are on average 400.00 USD . Why should the people on this planet be subject to such inflated prices obviously gouged by the producers of said content. this is the fight of freedom and crushing the system that has for so long tried to crush us.

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Rocka — Sun, 30 Jul 2006 06:49:44 -0000

the ipod and all the legal mp3/download sites out there produce millions of dollers wich should be enough to let ppl share. Qhat P2P does is stop everything from dissapearing. Rare and hard to find songs n movies are now more accessible. Old classic games are now becoming popular again and ppl can play there favs again without hunting forever. Old ppl can now be assured they can wtch classics that they havnt seen since they were a kid. Look what its doing. Why does everyting have to revolve around money. I want to make sure my kids dont have to watch trash on T.V and instead the classic cartoons i grew up on that u cant find anymore that might have been ripped of old BETA tapes. All we ask is for you harsh ppl to think.

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

xoki — Wed, 05 Jul 2006 21:28:23 -0000

I'm hearing alot about Americans and such but i disagree with these assumptions completely. Situations like this have nothing to do with nationality, creed or race. The original ethics of P2P is very much based on the "share and share alike" idea. Wich is a proposal free of such a short sighted boundary. While i agree on the greed of "the haves" that's not the current standing of the present argument.

The point is Isohunt is has a crapload of legal sharing capabilities. It's not about stealing... it's about sharing. Once you taint your point of view with vulgarities, taunts and insults you diminish any point you had to represent, valid or not.

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

zer0C0ol — Wed, 05 Jul 2006 13:56:50 -0000

Well we all remember the recording songs off the radio crisis of the eighties, nearly bankrupted the entire global economy, it did on its arse.
Quote " You have the ability to review torrents before posting them. you also have the ability to search your website and remove the torrents already being distributed" MPAA.
My response to that MPAA is you have the ability to kiss my fat ass but i dont write you letters about it. P2P is here to stay, get over it and figure out some other way to stuff your fat wallets.

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

trix — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 02:34:41 -0000

Elliott Back wrote: "Come on guys. The theoretical underpinnings of open information and ethical p2p rest on the positive ideas of share and share alike, as well as the assumption that p2p doesnt directly deprive artists of earnings. Once you start talking about p2p as if its a vehicle to steal $$$$ from artists, studios, producers, et cetera, your claims lose all legitimacy!"

I must disagree with you here. The theoretical underpinnings may rest on those ideas for SOME, but not for all.
My claims hold full legitimacy until I believe them no longer.
I can only speak for myself, and I use p2p not quite as a vehicle to steal money from artists, but simply for the ability to spend my very hard earned money on the art that I deem worthy of that money. The way I see it, anyone can look a picture some artist painted before they buy it, they get full effect from that picture, THEN decide whether owning that peice of art is worth the price being charged for it. That is business. I would never buy a painting that the artist keeps covered up, or only shows me a small corner of, until I've already paid for it.
So using the same logic, I would never buy a movie of unknown value and quality (ARTISTIC quality I mean, not cam vs dvd) unless I had a chance to preview it first. And not just a corner or sample of it, I want to know, fully, what it is I am paying for. Now if I had not the choice I would probably own far less DVD's, but since I can download every movie that looks even remotely interesting and see it, for free, thanks to p2p, I can see many ones I might not have otherwise even heard of, judge it worthy (or not), and go out and buy it (or not).
Thus, my use of p2p (and for my own reasons), results in my *increased* spending on good movies and music that deserve the cash I spend. Not only that, my money is no longer rewarding nothing but the advertising agency, but instead acting as my vote on what movies were worth the making. Without the ability to preview the entire movie for free, the only thing I could go on is the advertising, so those lesser known gems with little advertising would never have gotten my cash. Like Donnie Darko (of which I own the directors cut DVD, two posters, a T-Shirt, and a bumper sticker), and Requiem for a Dream, and many others, that I heard about through the bittorrent site I am currently a member of.

Basically, I believe that in the end p2p will only encourage the making of good quality movies, and discourage alot of the trash that gets fostered off on the masses and makes unearned millions through pure advertising. Who hasn't seen ads and posters for a movie that made it look great, only to pay to see it in some form and discover the ads detailed the only remotely interesting parts of the movie, and the rest of it was boring monotony. A movie that is good enough to be worth buying, WILL be bought. Who hasn't seen a movie in theatres that was so good you HAD to go get the DVD just to own it and have it in your collection? And to show to friends, of course. Sure I could burn a dvdr of the movie, but there's a world of difference between sitting with a group of friends to show them this great movie, and popping in a dvdr, or grabbing the Directors Cut box and popping THAT in.

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Sucker — Fri, 16 Jun 2006 11:55:49 -0000

Google has a lot of copyrighted images on
its searches - I know, lets sue Google!

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Another idiot — Tue, 13 Jun 2006 08:00:22 -0000

As I read these posts I had the feeling a lot of people were missing the point; isohunt is NOT about downloading copyrighted work, it's about SHARING works to which you OWN the copyright YOURSELVES.
If you think the net exists solely to provide you with pirated movies,... may you be busted.
I don't know a lot about MPAA but they sound pretty reasonable compared to Belgian SABAM, a company representing music artists and other copyright holders. In Belgium it is forbidden to play a movie or music in public, to which you don't hold the rights. If you do hold the rights, you must still pay to sabam what is called a "reasonable fee" because you probably used a note or two, or even a few words, that accidentially can be found in their portfolio. Now what is playing such a work in public? Simply; if anyone else can hear it it's public; If in Belgium you've got a walkman/discman/ipod on your head, and it's loud anough for the guy sitting next to you on the train to hear it, you're violating copyrights. If your 5 year old kids start singing the last song from their favourite band; that's piracy. And I didn't make this up. SABAM agents come illegally onto private properties under the pretext that you may be playing their music. Which according to Belgian law, strangely suddenly becomes legal then. Even at your own wedding in your own garden it is forbidden to play your favourite SD, legally bought in the store at full price (if you have other people at your wedding, which I think most people do).
Point is those so-called "copyright-protection" companies are businesses, extortion-offices, exercising mafia practices; To the artists they say; "pay us money, and we'll protect you". If the artist doesn't pay, they 'll make sure he can't perform his art anymore.
If an artist sued someone for stealing his work, I could respect that, but these companies wield so-much money it's almost impossible to win from them, even if you're right.

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

anonymous capitalist — Tue, 30 May 2006 22:23:12 -0000

Hey all you neo-leftwing internet geeks. Maybe we should all find girlfriends off the "net" too. Why should Gary Fung get any of my hard earned money either, because he is a genius with computers? You are now getting sucked into the cyber vortex, proud that you can consume without spending. This could be the future when no one has to work in order to survive. The film indusry provides jobs, which many of you may not have, not just to Tom Criuse but millions of average joes like us. And in Vancouver, if you you are not glued to a keyboard, you may be lucky enough to work in the film or entertainment industry. And why would I want to watch a deadbeats sad attempt at filmmaking? Sure Hollywood pumps out formula crap to non-thinkers, so why download the crap at all? But then you are willing to go see a "well done" movie in the theaters, seems like a double standard. Let's face it, can we really do what we love to do for free? I'm sure Mr. Fung would love to have Bill Gateses money and power.

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Julio Cezar Chavez — Fri, 26 May 2006 03:52:23 -0000

Piracy has a financial effect similar to a boycott. Funny thing is, with a boycott, it drives the prices of goods down. Yet the "Industry" raises its prices in response to piracy...They claim piracy costs them so much money. Really, it costs little more than a boycott would. The added cost really exists only in litigation. Can't blame it on anti-piracy R&D. If it was a boycott, there'd be a greater focus on marketing R&D. Just thought I'd mention it.

Why do the big guys pick on ISOHunt and the like? Only because they're a focal point for license breaking data pirates. If they can pay 10k in intimidating a site to shut down, well, that's much cheaper than taking on each and every one of the 200,000 connected users leeching a copy of Ocean's Eleven at 5k per person.

MPAA and their peers are not ignorant to this fact. They know FULL WELL they have no legal grounds against ISOHunt. But if they play their cards just right they just might have a chance at scaring the bejesus out of torrent sites to the extent they shut their doors. Wouldn't that make things less convenient for the "Oooh, BitCommet, what's this do?" Homer Simpson types. Piracy will then fall back to the background of hardcore data disseminators who do their thing cuz it's a bag of kicks, or cuz "It's like, the principle of the whole institution, ya dig?"

Will MPAA and the ilk desist from their harrasment? Hell no! They're biding their time, waiting for the courts of the world to finally sit down and define piracy (making litigation efficient and worthwhile), etc, or for the gov't's to finally directly oversee Internet data distribution (whereby taxes alone will foot the bill for your court case).

End. You are dismissed. Well except for the Canadians...

To all you fucking Canucks. Don't think I don't know about your plan to invade the U.S. Oh yeah, I know ALL about it. You say "They outsource all their jobs to India, soon they'll do it with their military! When they do, BAM, we invade!!" Well, I got news fer you, America doesn't trust brown people from anywhere outside our continent.

Ok, just kidding, I love Canadians. Yup, even the ones that speak French. Canada, home of the other white meat...All hail your emporer!!!..........or whatever the hell you people have running that crazy circle of funky kicks up there.

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

John Doe — Tue, 23 May 2006 12:02:30 -0000

All these arguements are quite intersting. But I wonder where all this is leading. There are TWO tools in use here when a person (me you anyone) downloads a movie or album, in this case anyway.
1. Some kind of P2P filesharing system (Im fairly new to all this so I wont pretend I know how they work
2. Is the ISP which provides the person with access to the P2P system in the first place.

If ISOHUNT is committing a crime by providing the general public with a tool to commit a crime, (and piracy IS a crime) as is the claim of the MPAA, then the next logical conclusion after they have trampled on ISOHUNT and all the others is to claim that the ISPs commit the same crime by acting as the catalyst for the whole thing. Because we all know that as long as you allow people levels of communication possibilities offered on the internet, they WILL find a way to share any kind of information they want to.
Then it becomes an arguement not for the rights of the artists and those who invest in them, but an arguement about the basic freedoms of every citizen of the world. The existance of the internet has become a thorn in the side of the entertainment industry because it is the only place where people are really free to be what they want.... An arsehole who steals the work and innovation of people probably greater than them OR A responsible person who is willing to pay for the pleasure of the entertainment.
There must be room for both.
The entertainment industry, the music industry in particular, suffers only because of its own ignorace of opportunities offered by the internet. These industries are dinosaurs and the dinosars got what was coming to them

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Plain and Simple — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 08:36:29 -0000

BTW, they make the distinction clear in that final sentence. They KNOW the difference in the two and still they attack an innocent bystander. Torrents are not the copyrighted files themselves and vice-versa. It is a shame that even though they know this... they continue to harass isohunt. (Isn't there a LAW against HARASSMENT?????????) Who is the criminal here?

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Plain and Simple — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 08:22:39 -0000

Here is one of their letters--- just to remind you.

As we have said repeatedly, a significant amount of copyright infringement is occurring as a result of your website and tracker. Apart from the knowledge you have by virtue of your day to day operation of the site and server, we have put you on notice that the infringement is occurring. The list of representative works that was attached to our notice letter was merely a sample of the infringement occurring on your site. We have requested that you stop the infringing conduct immediately. That you have automated the process of adding torrents to your website is not a defense. You have the ability to review torrents before posting them. You also have the ability to search your website and review the torrents that are already being distributed. There should be little doubt, for example, that Oceans Twelve which is a torrent offered on your site is copyrighted and should not be distributed. A copyright holder is not obliged to monitor all the websites and the servers around the world to police and protect each and every work from those who would choose to close their eyes to ongoing infringement. It is incumbent on you to distribute only those torrents that correspond to files that you know are authorized to be distributed.

********************************************************
The first sentence is TRUE. Second sentence why notify you... you are not distributing the actual files that ARE copyrighted? Third sentence is completely FALSE, no infringements are occurring through the site itself!!! Fourth sentence is obviously TRUE, but actually ridiculous, since the site does not actually distribute the files in question!
The next sentence is just irrelevant, there is no law against automation, and again the torrents ARE NOT the copyrighted material! Sixth sentence, yes, isohunt may have the ability to review torrents, but the torrents themselves are not copyrights of MPAA or RIAA and therefore none of your actual concern.Seventh statement -- Yes, that is what ISOHUNT's purpose is - it is after all a search engine and a very nice one at that!
Woah Nelly!!! The next sentence is ABSOLUTELY and UNDENIABLY --- FALSE,FALSE,FALSE --- The MOVIE "Ocean's Twelve" is copyrighted, the torrent however IS NOT!! BIG DIFFERENCE!
The next sentence is irrelevant as ISOHUNT is not committing any illegal act whatsoever.Why should they be policed?????
And lastly, WHO ARE THEY to tell ISOHUNT what to distribute... they do not, and I reiterate, DO NOT hold copyrights on the torrent files and therefore have absolutely no right to demand how, when, or where such files are distributed...

Your Honor... I rest my case!

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Plain and Simple — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 08:00:19 -0000

REMEMBER THE SALEM WITCH HUNTS. A group of individuals targetted innocent people with accussations that could not be substantiated (not sanely, anyways)... but never-the-less the innocent people were executed anyway!!!

STOP being witch-hunters MPAA and RIAA... if you want to prosecute, go after the "actual" guilty parties!!!!

Re: ISOHunt MPAA Letter — Elliott C. Back

Plain and Simple — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 07:54:55 -0000

P2P is Legal...
Isohunt is doing absolutely nothing illegal by displaying any and all torrent files. The MPAA and RIAA are just not very enlightened. The torrent IS NOT the actual download file, it is a non-copyrighted (at least I haven't heard of anyone copyrighting a torrent file yet!) and therefore 100% legal. The problem however lies in the fact that it points the way to a possibly illegal file...
OK, an analogy would be...
I am out looking for a car (a nice car) and I find a carlot that is giving away free automobiles (yeah, I know not very realistic, but...) the thing is that giving away free autos is illegal, (because the manufacturer does not make money, no taxes are paid, etc.) Well I write down how and where to find this place of business on a piece of paper (I never actually recieve a car, BTW) and and I begin telling ALL my friends...
OK, the only people who have committed a crime in this case is the individuals who take advantage of this opportunity... and the carlot operator.
The person who supplied the info (as long a he informs the friends that actually getting an auto is illegal) has committed absolutely NO CRIME.

The following is a definition of torrents...

Definition: In peer-to-peer networking, Bit Torrents are small text files. A torrent contains the location of data files that can be download from the Bit Torrent peer to peer network. The torrent file also contains some identifying information about P2P files.
Torrent files can be found on numerous Web sites. Bit Torrents can be loaded into the BitTorrent P2P client to initiate the actual download. When saved on a computer they also serve as bookmarks to available files, for future reference.

The Bit Torrent P2P network has become extremely popular for sharing television and movie video files. Torrents makes it possible to search for these very large files while using minimal network bandwidth. Torrents conserve bandwidth on the Bit Torrent network for the actual file swapping itself.
***********************************************
FIGHT Those Stupid B@st@rds ISOHUNT, knowledge is POWER.
(and when it comes to the MPAA and RIAA ignorance is bliss!!)
They have absolutely no right to target YOU to achieve their goal no matter how desperate their attempts to stop copyright infringement... this in itself is a crime on their part (although not enforceable)!!! Wrongful prosecution.