Forums General Discussion File sharring on IRC

If guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.

If file sharring is wrong why does the IRC protocols support it?

Why does mIRC include a native server as well as a way to send and recieve files.

If files are outlawed only outlaws will have files.

It really should be a felony to share Defranko Family, Tony Orlando and Dawn, and the Osmonds.

The guy that invented smiley faces should have been arrested and executed. There is no justice.

Actually, the IRC Protocol does not support DCC.
mIRC only uses IRC to initiate the DCC between
the two clients. You can DCC without being
connected to IRC at all by specifying an IP address
instead of a nick /help /dccserver

"If file sharring is wrong why does the IRC protocols support it?"

It doesn't, mIRC does. It is meant for exchanging pictures or wav files etc - for example, at Christmas a friend sent me pics of their christmas tree and house lights etc, and a few days ago another friend sent me a .wav file of her daughter giggling (so sweet!). Unfortunately, like many things related to IRC/mIRC it is abused. Just look how people acted when the DCC exploit was discovered *rolls eyes*

"Why does mIRC include a native server as well as a way to send and recieve files."

By "native server" I assume you mean a server which is there primarily for file trading...personally, I don't know, Krejt deals with the server list and he makes the decisions as to what goes in there. Perhaps he's not aware of it, you can email him at Krejt@ (mirc dot com). On the other hand, perhaps the server does also support chatting and isn't 100% only there for file trading, in which case it's not a problem...can't not include a server just because they allow file sharing, many servers/networks do.

As for mIRC having an Fserve feature, I believe that is still there due to the fact that there are people who use it honestly. And anyway, even removing it would be pointless. I don't even know if fserve scripts that are so widely used even use that feature in mIRC. As you can see from Khaled's FAQ:

"IRC is about communication. Both chat and file-sharing are a normal part of communication, and always have been. IRC has been around since 1988, long before the mass file-sharing systems that we see today came into existence.

Although mIRC has a file-server, it is simple and crude, and was designed years ago for basic personal use, to allow individuals to share files with friends, family, and colleagues, and is nothing like the sophisticated and dedicated file-sharing systems in existence today, which are specifically designed to facilitate the sharing of files on a mass scale."

"If files are outlawed only outlaws will have files."

Yep - which is why Khaled doesn't like the way mIRC is often used as a file sharing program, and also why us on these mIRC message boards do not help with illegal file trading, as you can see from this post.

"It really should be a felony to share Defranko Family, Tony Orlando and Dawn, and the Osmonds.

It is - just not in the sense I think you mean it *G*

"The guy that invented smiley faces should have been arrested and executed. There is no justice."

Aww, come on, he's not all that bad

Happy chatting!

Regards,

Because it looks nicer !

Well I'll ignore the part about IRC supporting filesharing since many people have already tackled that point, but I will just say that filesharing is not wrong. The sharing of copyrighted material is illegal in many countries, but that's not the same as filesharing. Granted many idiots use filesharing solely for that purpose but that doesn't mean it's the only one. Another point to make is that many IRC chatters (myself included) do consider using IRC for filesharing to be wrong, in the sense that not only is it a poor substitute for a real filesharing protocol and network but it also often greatly irritates chatters by causing many IRC-illiterate people to come on IRC and related forums such as this one and ask questions about filesharing without even realising IRC's true intended purpose.

It really should be a felony to share Defranko Family, Tony Orlando and Dawn, and the Osmonds.

It already is a felony, it just depends on how much illegal software you are shifting and how often. The big difference between a misdemeanour and a felony is the intensity of an offence rather than the actual offence itself.

This of course depends on the country, as Starbucks pointed out. In some countries you can share any file with anyone subject only to availability. Those countries whose laws forbid breach of copyright would treat someone sending a few dodgy MPEGs alot more lightly than someone with banks of computers and VCRs and running a distribution network.

general reply: if i buy a cd and put it on my pc, if i want to share it then i will, after all i payed for it so i can do what i want with it.

Well you're correct up to that sharing part.
It's not illegal to rip it and have it on your pc yet,
it is illegal to share it with others.

then the law can **** off.

Hear! Hear!

there are too many people sharing on the web for anybody to ever even come close to stopping it i just heard that the kazaalite website was shut down but ppl will find another way so why bother? it is a losing battle

so are most things .

That's not really the attitude anyone needs. The law is not going to go anywhere, and whilst you're alive, you're required to abide by it, and I'm afraid to say, it's whether you like it or not.

But oh well, people won't change their attitudes, which is of course half the problem..if not THE problem.

Regards,

i dont download files myself, but im just saying: if i pay £15 for a cd, why can't i share it with friends?
my money, my cd, my choice.
but as usual the law is stupid.

Because all of your friends should also be paying 15 quid for that CD - if it were just your friends, it wouldn't matter, but when it's a culmination of people doing exactly the same thing you have people losing millions - people can't make a profit, and that's business for you. The companies release the CD's with copyright notices and the law forces people to abide by it...so if you think copyright law is stupid then blame the businesses for trying to make as much profit as possible, not the law.

If you had the ability/chance to make millions rather than hundreds of thousands, what would you choose?

Regards,

Personally, I feel if the music industry wouldn't be so greedy to make store increase to $15 (And sometimes $17) for a cd, then there wouldn't be half as much pirating. I can only speculate, but it most likely costs the record industry (at MOST) a quarter (thats $0.25) per cd. A lil markup, some money for the author, and you're at $15?

Maybe if they started charging reasonable fares, people would actually purchase full cds. Besides, the off chance a person wants a whole cd is slim. Most of my friends buy a cd for indiviual tracks (maybe even 2).

Perhaps...although looking at currency conversion, $15 is incredibly cheap. CD's in England are around 15 pounds each, which is around $27..but anyway, the point is it is not up for people to decide how the companies set their prices and whether or not you agree with those prices. You can write and complain, form a pressure group, but you cannot simply say "Hey, I'm going to break the law because I don't like your prices!"

If people ARE going to do that, then they need to apply it to the rest of their activities too. Meaning if they don't like the rising prices of cigarettes, they can grow their own tobacco plants and make them themselves. If bread became expensive, bake their own bread. Of course, they wouldn't do that, they'd be willing to pay more for it - but they won't with CD's, and somehow that is acceptable.

*shrugs* just the way I see it.

Regards,

Well yeah because you can't download
a cigarette or a loaf of bread for free.

Precisely, which is exactly why the ability should be prevented.

Regards,

Prevent all you want .. it's not going to stop.