No, you misquote me, I never said filesharing was illegal, come to think of it, I didn't mention the word "illegal" at any time in this thread apart from right now. What I did say is that IRC is not intended to be a filesharing environment - in context this means that filesharing should be limited to the personal exchange of freeware files such as some MP3's, WAV's, JPG's, etc which is what the DCC protocol was developed for.
A lot of pressure for other countries to change their laws has come from the US...
This is hardly anything more than urban myth, given that the US has laws no stronger than those of any other country regarding copyright. What they do have is laws equal/equivalent to other countries, that being if you breach copyright, you can be fined or go to prison for it or even be sued by the copyright owner if they feel it necessary or justifyable. Just to set this in concrete, the US and other developed countries have signed to treaties which enforce minimum standards which apply to the said copyright laws in each country that is a signatory to the treaties.
in the next 10 years the average line speed for DSL customers is expected to rise to 20MBS+
*Watchdog chokes on his curry pie.
20Mbs down a twisted pair copper line? If it's possible it will certainly be unaffordable, at least in this part of the world.
I do not want to turn this into a political argument
Yet you decided to make it one by bagging right-wing elements of the US government. What has capitalism got to do with any laws or the enforcement thereof of copyright? If socialism becomes more widespread it would only lead to further restrictions and further censorship of the right to free speech, 'free speech',in my view being a flawed expression outlining what many believe to be where you can say anything you like at any time without reprisals.
...as a linux user all my software needs are met for free, I prefer to own music CDs.
Am I missing something here or does one's OS of choice govern one's desire to trade files?
So ok the technical objection is that it might cause n00bs to click on links they shouldn't, but there is also a setting in MIRC that says 'autoget file and minimise' (or words to that effect).
Yes, there is infact a function like the one you describe but that doesn't alter the fact that the suggested one is just as bad, if not worse for the same reasons. As I mentioned before, what you want has been mentioned a number of times and has been replied to the same way each time. I don't dispute that it would be handy, I am only disputing the fact that those with a low level of integrity would abuse the situation and it would be completely impossible to manage from a channel owners perspective. As I mentioned before, someone can be excluded for quoting clickable URLs in a room but they cannot be excluded for just quoting a keyword which is a link under your proposal because the keyword could be any legitimate English word. People shouldn't be subject to black holes just because they are new to the 'Net, rather there should be every reason to make sure they know the dangers and are protected from them.
