Editorial

Learning from 4chan's vendetta

Last weekend you may have heard that notorious message board 4chan got together once again under the name "Anonymous" and DDoS'd the websites of the RIAA and MPAA. This was in response to a claimed DDoSing of The Pirate Bay, done by a company hired by anti-piracy organizations, AiPlex. In the past, AiPlex has come out and admitted to DDoSing uncooperative torrent sites. A DDoS, by the way is a Distributed Denial of Service attack which is caused by users sending large masses of data to a server in order to cripple its operations.

What does this mean for the RIAA, MPAA, digital music industry, and the pirate community? The message from 4chan is clear: Do not mess with the internet. 4chan is all for keeping the internet an open and uncensored place, which they demonstrate by taking down websites that promote censoring and oppression. That fact in itself is ironic, as is 4chan not just censoring the internet to their own standards? Regardless, the initial DDoS attack by AiPlex was uncalled for, and rather juvenile. Instead of taking legal action or other proper routes, they decide to take matters into their own hands and attempt to take down The Pirate Bay. What is equally as juvenile is that 4chan returns in kind and attacked the RIAA and MPAA.

If there are any lessons that should be learned from this, it is that those who pirate are obviously not satisfied with RIAA and MPAA attempts to control content distribution. iTunes and Zune have taken large steps in how they distribute content by removing the DRM on their audio files they have up for download. Once you buy it, you keep it. There are no worries about losing content when suddenly you forget your username and password, or if you do not wish to play it using the provider’s player, you have that freedom.

4chan should not have to be the people to make this clear to the RIAA and MPAA, instead it should be the mere fact that pirate communities exist. The goal should not be to shut down any site, as everyone does have a right to speak their mind, but instead find solutions that will satisfy as many parties as possible. With the amount of piracy that goes on, it is obvious that process of purchasing content needs to be given some more thought and made less of a hassle. 

For instance, iTunes has made all of the tracks you purchase from the service DRM-free. Knowing this, the file can be put on, and played on anything. If someone buys a CD, they are free to do with it what they want, so why not allow users to do the same with the music they buy digitally? The Zune Pass is a great alternative as well, while it doesn't give DRM free music, it is easy to just go in and find any song you wish to play, and simply play it or download. The fees aren't always an issue when you have essentially no limits except for the store itself, although we will always prefer the DRM-free version, obviously.

Movies and TV shows should be this way as well. The cost of a movie can be seen as relatively expensive, especially for locking it down to one player or one company's brand. Files should work like physical media in the household, if a family member wishes to use it, they should be able just to go and play the file, on whatever device they may have. All of the restrictions fuel piracy, as people just want to have control over what they purchase.

Do not misunderstand though, I do not approve of 4chan’s decision to DDoS the RIAA and MPAA, nor do I approve of the anti-piracy companies’ idea to DDoS a torrent website. These were both very childish actions, but maybe something can be learned from them yet. Perhaps simply the fact that users want access to content more easily, and that they are willing to pay if the process isn't too much of a hassle to use.

Image Credit: Jacob Davis, from Flickr

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Facebook Places now live in Canada

Next Story

Google: Bing is our competitor, Apple is not

74 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

The other day I played F1 2010 for less than 30 minutes. I didn't like it and deleted it right away from my computer. Why should I pay 45 euros for that?

Setnom said,
The other day I played F1 2010 for less than 30 minutes. I didn't like it and deleted it right away from my computer. Why should I pay 45 euros for that?

Yeah, piracy also happens because of the lack of demos.

Message to the RIAA from Anonymous.

We like stealing stuff, don't mess with our methods for doing so. We are just the coolest bunch of geeks out there for fighting "the good fight."

This seems to be the sentiment to a lot of people on the internet which is sad.

I will not speak for a group of people, but I can say with certainty, there are a lot of people out there who don't pirate nor care about the topic at all, but are extremely worried about the Internet becoming policed, bordered off, and restricted to free speech.

Many of us fight for net neutrality, and on occasion we've had such groups as Anon advocate it without any request.

This is not to say the DDOS'ing had anything to do with net neutrality, but don't be blind; a lot of us are simply worried, and topics such as piracy often become the frontlines for how the Internet will be in the years to come.

Sometimes I think it helps to 1st put things in perspective -- when it comes to the behavior of the big media owners/providers it can be useful to apply their actions to other fields &/or industries, to better highlight the absurdity that too often gets both ignored & accepted. For instance, would you buy a pair of jeans that required you to watch advertisements every time you pulled them on [the same way you're captive to ads when you watch a DVD/BD]? And would you buy a pair of jeans that you couldn't wear anywhere you wanted, or couldn't return to the store regardless the reason? Now of course someone will remind me that you can't copy a pair of jeans, but you can copy the style &/or design -- it happens, & it's a problem companies branding/making jeans deal with, all without putting any restrictions on the buyer. Theft happens, every day in most every store around the world, & yet you're not forced to subject yourself to search & seizure at someone's whim. Theft costs store owners, & banks, & just about every enterprise money, which they simply add to the cost of doing biz. Why? Because their customers wouldn't put up with being treated poorly or unfairly, not because they're saints in waiting... many [some would say most] companies don't think twice about stealing designs or any other intellectual or creative property, but they also believe in a simple math calculation, where no customers = no income = no profit = no food on their table. Big media OTOH pushes the adversarial aspects of the buyer/seller relationship to the forefront, perhaps over confident they can sell their often deplorable behavior to the public, the same way they sell their content, based on carefully honed images & ideas rather than honesty. It often works.

By hiring the RIAA & MPAA, the media content industries aren't all that different from Henry Ford when he hired union busters a century ago. Back then you had guys paid to swing an ax handle -- today you have folks paid to mount a DDoS attack. Back then the union members swung back -- the other day some folks swung back with their own DDoS. If/When you push the envelope, being bad or good, you attract attention & you inspire both action & reaction. Hiring thugs -- even if nobody involved looks like a leg-breaker from the Sopranos -- inspires reaction. It should be expected, the same way you should expect to at least get flipped off when you cut someone off on the highway. Nearby drivers will mostly think you're a butthead, generally without making any value judgment on the person who flipped you off. In the same way public opinion re: the DDoS is understandably & for the most part that the RIAA & MPAA [+ those paying them] are the buttheads. If it leads to anything it'll be because getting caught hiring thugs in the first place makes it harder for the media content owners to sell you on all their wonderful virtues...

There are always going to be people who steal. When their perception is that they're not just being taken advantage of, but abused, otherwise honest people learn how to be dishonest too -- look at insurance fraud, or cheating on your taxes. This is the lessen the big media content owners have always tried hard not to learn, refused to learn. Consumers who find that they can't play a DVD or BD because of all the DRM, & if/when they do get it to play find they have to sit through 1/2 an hour of commercials 1st, are often inclined to learn how to rip them, & once they've learned, once they've taken that step, it's not a big leap to start ripping discs they don't own. The same thing applies when they want to play the movie they bought on something besides their DVD/BD player. Same goes for music, though content owners are starting to learn & sell tracks on-line without heavy DRM. Rather than appeal to someone's conscience or try hard to inspire fear, stop making them feel abused -- if you're not pig-headed about it, it's really simple... ripping DVDs/BDs is work, & we all have better things to do, so take away the incentive by not abusing the folks you want to pay for your bread & butter -- not to mention limos & yachts.

It's so funny to read that some ppl wrote against ppl who download stuff "illegally" over the internet, they call them ******** they are so angry about them, but damn, look at you first, i'm pretty sure 90% of all of you won't admit it, YOU ARE DOING ILLEGAL STUFF OVER THE INTERNET TOO!!!! so stop complaining against all of them who are downloading or what ever they do online. I'm paying an internet connection, same for you.

First off it wasn't 4chan or Anonymous who took down AiPlex but a different group that blamed them. The situation then snowballed to the DDoS attempts on RIAA / MPAA. Juvenile? Most likely, but the schoolyard "he started it" applies as well as the belief that if a supposedly legit company can DDoS "legally" then so can anybody else. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

I don't believe it is pure greed, there is some stupidity there as well. It bugs me when I read things like “Piracy cost ‘the industry' <some absurd amount of money> this month/quarter/year.” Sure, some of us may have hundreds of thousands of songs we didn't pay for, and may not have even listened to yet. However if the internet didn't exist or new anti-piracy technology / legislation suddenly became effective, we probably wouldn't pay for 1% of it - we would be choosy, cautious and only buy stuff we REALLY liked.

Rather than complain about lost profits, make your content easier to get at and put whatever you're paying AiPlex and the like into lowering costs. I would love a Zune pass for example, but it's not available in Canada. Sure I could find a US based proxy, get a pre-paid credit card and a P.O. Box (i.e. friend) with an address in America, but it is easier to just torrent it. Until digital downloads are as easier and/or cheaper than Goggling “Album + Rapidshare”, people will inevitably pay for the premium account instead of purchasing the actual content.

Oh, spare me this DRM horse sh*t. Let's grow up and stop blaming DRM and the music/film industries' DRM and poor quality of product. When I used to pirate things, it was because I could not *comfortably* afford them (Now that a buck a song doesn't put a dent in my paycheck, it makes more sense to purchase the traqcks). It had nothing to do with restrictions or ease of attainability. I strongly suspect this is the same story with most pirates. If prices were lowered to the level needed to curb piracy, it would be sold at a crippling loss since adding a small percentage of sales from pirates won't make up from the loss of revenue from existing sales. And even then, there will still be plenty of people who will be more inclined to pay nothing than a little bit. These industries don't really have a good solution with their current course of action, but I don't know if a better one exists.

Skwerl said,
Oh, spare me this DRM horse sh*t. Let's grow up and stop blaming DRM and the music/film industries' DRM and poor quality of product. When I used to pirate things, it was because I could not *comfortably* afford them (Now that a buck a song doesn't put a dent in my paycheck, it makes more sense to purchase the traqcks). It had nothing to do with restrictions or ease of attainability. I strongly suspect this is the same story with most pirates.

FWIW, IMHO yes & no... Yes, whether you're talking software or movies or tunes, unfortunately there are people who are locked out of the market because they simply don't have the cash. And yes, ripping or finding/downloading content is work, sometimes very time consuming work. But when you can't do what you want with what you bought, so you have to do the work anyway, where's the incentive to buy? And when the advertising is not the most truthful, how do you judge whether it's worth buying? Like going to a restaurant, try before you buy isn't always possible or expected, but misleading the consumer does not encourage their honest behavior by any means. Every other industry makes you want to buy their products -- the media industries assume you want what they sell, & the biggest reason they give you to buy them is you'll go to jail if you don't!!!

Lowering prices may/may not make a difference depending on what you're talking about. Broadcast TV is free because you have to sit through commercials. Regular cable is lower cost for the same reason, & that's how/why you can watch TV shows on-line -- because you watch their ads. Since our viewing the ads is obviously worth something, where's our discount when the ads are on a DVD/BD? Sell a $15 disc for $5 or less because of the ads & I firmly believe it would make a big difference. Hollywood would make less $ per disc, but sell more of them so profits would probably increase... not that anyone should feel sorry for them if they had to operate like any other biz with reasonable practices & expenses.

Well, I assume the article poster realized that Anon tried to DDoS MPAA a second time but failed hard because of DosArrest.

It was an utter fail.

wouldn't the antipiracy organizations get in trouble for doing something illegal like DDoS'ing in the first place? Besides all linux distros are on piratebay, so I don't see how that's pirating.

stablemist said,
wouldn't the antipiracy organizations get in trouble for doing something illegal like DDoS'ing in the first place? Besides all linux distros are on piratebay, so I don't see how that's pirating.
In court the pirate bay wouldn't stand a chance. Especially not in an American court.

As for "all linux distros are on piratebay comment", so are all Windows releases. All the latest DVD releases... For the sake of your own dignity please don't try using "there's legal **** there too!" as a defense.

(I support piratebay by the way, I just think it's good to be honest that you're doing something wrong. Personally I'm fine with it, only idiots are moral when they don't need to be.)

Tbh, I agree with 4chan on this matter. Many people come to the Internet to get away from the real world because they can feel free. If the Internet then gets censored there will be no such place.

Why do all of these sorts of articles about "pirates" say we pirate because there aren't many avenues for legal content distribution, that are good?

I pirate because I don't like paying money. And it's that fkn simple. There could be a million legal, cheap and easy websites to get online content at a cost. I don't care. I don't want to pay.

And I'm sure that's how a lot of us terrible pirates think too.

Nashy said,
Why do all of these sorts of articles about "pirates" say we pirate because there aren't many avenues for legal content distribution, that are good?

I pirate because I don't like paying money. And it's that fkn simple. There could be a million legal, cheap and easy websites to get online content at a cost. I don't care. I don't want to pay.

And I'm sure that's how a lot of us terrible pirates think too.

How can you 'not like paying' when you have the money?

Glendi said,

How can you 'not like paying' when you have the money?

First off. When did I once mention my financial situation? Silly comment really.

Why would I pay for something when I can easily get it for free? I have no moral objection to piracy, so what's the problem exactly?

If the only reason is a few goody goods on the Internet telling me how bad I am, then to be honest, I'm going to continue getting **** for free.

Nashy said,

First off. When did I once mention my financial situation? Silly comment really.

Why would I pay for something when I can easily get it for free? I have no moral objection to piracy, so what's the problem exactly?

If the only reason is a few goody goods on the Internet telling me how bad I am, then to be honest, I'm going to continue getting **** for free.

Amen.....
same reason why I never buy hardware that can not be hacked/supported by backups.

truth of the matter is I dont; feel guilty at all downloading. Since Im paying for a ISP mite as well take full advantage of it eh? Exspeclly when I have unlimited Bandwith to boot.

Instead of Windows Catch phrase "were do i want to go today"
my catch phrase is "what do i want to torrent today"
Information should be free, Share it. yes thats including your 1's and 0's

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/8718/img5003q.jpg

Edited by MadDoggyca, Sep 25 2010, 5:35am :

Nashy said,

First off. When did I once mention my financial situation? Silly comment really.

Why would I pay for something when I can easily get it for free? I have no moral objection to piracy, so what's the problem exactly?

If the only reason is a few goody goods on the Internet telling me how bad I am, then to be honest, I'm going to continue getting **** for free.

No it's not a silly comment. You're the silly one for not understanding what you write. If you say 'I don't like paying' it means you have money. 'I can't afford it' means you don't. Ever heard a poor guy that says 'I don't like paying for that'? Clearly not.

And you pay to support the people who give you whatever you download. If you don't do that you're quite the arrogant guy. You're not getting things for free, you're infringing copyright.

Glendi said,

No it's not a silly comment. You're the silly one for not understanding what you write. If you say 'I don't like paying' it means you have money. 'I can't afford it' means you don't. Ever heard a poor guy that says 'I don't like paying for that'? Clearly not.

And you pay to support the people who give you whatever you download. If you don't do that you're quite the arrogant guy. You're not getting things for free, you're infringing copyright.

Obviously things are taken in different places of the world. Just because I say that I don't want to pay, doesn't mean I have bags of money I can throw around the place.

I get paid well, but the money I earn, goes onto other things. Like bills. That are never ending. And what's left, I spend on the things I can't get for free as easily as I can with music and movies.

But so you understand. After I've spent all of my money on bills, living and things I want to pay money for, I am poor. But it's usually ok, because then pay day comes along the next day, and I'm ready to not pay for music or movies again.

Why? because I don't want to.

Nashy said,

Obviously things are taken in different places of the world. Just because I say that I don't want to pay, doesn't mean I have bags of money I can throw around the place.

I get paid well, but the money I earn, goes onto other things. Like bills. That are never ending. And what's left, I spend on the things I can't get for free as easily as I can with music and movies.

But so you understand. After I've spent all of my money on bills, living and things I want to pay money for, I am poor. But it's usually ok, because then pay day comes along the next day, and I'm ready to not pay for music or movies again.

Why? because I don't want to.

A poor attempt at satire......

3lixir said,

A poor attempt at satire......

Well it maybe classed as a poor attempt if I was being sarcastic.

All I want people to realise is that there are people out there, like me, who have no problems with pirating.

I'm not spending my money on it, while I can get it for nothing.

3lixir said,

A poor attempt at satire......

Well it maybe classed as a poor attempt if I was being sarcastic.

All I want people to realise is that there are people out there, like me, who have no problems with pirating.

I'm not spending my money on it, while I can get it for nothing.

What many people don't take into account when talking about the large amount of piracy in this day and age is the fact the the vast majority of piracy consumers can't afford to buy those products even if they wanted to because of the sole reason that they are poor and have more pressing needs.

Many of us have the "luxury" or "fortune" to have a job, to run a business or just to have money to spend in what we need/want at any given time.

I will talk about one example: here in Mexico, pirated movies, software and other goods are being sold in broad daylight, with the authorities involved (they collect bribes and some even run some businesses) in many cases. There are many commercials being ran in the movie theaters that talk about "what does buying pirated movies say about you?".

They don't seem to realize that 60% of the population lives in extreme poverty and for those who have a job, approximately 80% (taking the official figures with a grain of salt) earn between $4.5 and $9 dollars a day. The ticket to see a movie costs $4.61 dollars and a pirated movie costs $0.75 dollars.

They want less piracy, why don't sell their products cheaper so most people can actually afford it?

ajua said,
What many people don't take into account when talking about the large amount of piracy in this day and age is the fact the the vast majority of piracy consumers can't afford to buy those products even if they wanted to because of the sole reason that they are poor and have more pressing needs.

Many of us have the "luxury" or "fortune" to have a job, to run a business or just to have money to spend in what we need/want at any given time.

I will talk about one example: here in Mexico, pirated movies, software and other goods are being sold in broad daylight, with the authorities involved (they collect bribes and some even run some businesses) in many cases. There are many commercials being ran in the movie theaters that talk about "what does buying pirated movies say about you?".

They don't seem to realize that 60% of the population lives in extreme poverty and for those who have a job, approximately 80% (taking the official figures with a grain of salt) earn between $4.5 and $9 dollars a day. The ticket to see a movie costs $4.61 dollars and a pirated movie costs $0.75 dollars.

They want less piracy, why don't sell their products cheaper so most people can actually afford it?

It's hard to agree with you when I see people downloading gigs of music from limewire but yet can afford all the other luxuries in their life. I'm a former pirate myself. I will usually buy what I want. If I can't afford the item that I want I will either save up or find a cheaper alternative. Movies just wait until I can get them later on.

shinji257 said,

It's hard to agree with you when I see people downloading gigs of music from limewire but yet can afford all the other luxuries in their life. I'm a former pirate myself. I will usually buy what I want. If I can't afford the item that I want I will either save up or find a cheaper alternative. Movies just wait until I can get them later on.

Cheaper alternative = torrents
and Limewire = 2002

Amen Lazlo!
IMHO poor article beacuse:
1) Poor logic (as Lazlo pointed out)
2) Not all facts are facts (4chan != anon)
3) I felt your article start to turn into an infomertial towards the end (specially the iTunes bit)
Although you did make a couple of good points about the accessibility of music and other digital media, this is still a poor article

bb_seraph said,
Amen Lazlo!
IMHO poor article beacuse:
1) Poor logic (as Lazlo pointed out)
2) Not all facts are facts (4chan != anon)
3) I felt your article start to turn into an infomertial towards the end (specially the iTunes bit)
Although you did make a couple of good points about the accessibility of music and other digital media, this is still a poor article

+100000

If new release music, games, applications and movies weren't so ridiculously overpriced - Piracy wouldn't exist in the first place.

If companies really cared about the consumers they market towards they would lower prices so low that people would be stupid not to just buy it, instead of wasting bandwidth downloading it.

For example:

I would buy a newly released 5 dollar CD.
I would buy a newly released 5 dollar movie.
I would buy a newly released application suite for 20 dollars.

The fact of the matter is, companies are just greedy, thus-Piracy will always exist out of this bred greed.

Joseph B said,
If new release music, games, applications and movies weren't so ridiculously overpriced - Piracy wouldn't exist in the first place.

bull****. The Humble Indie bundle, could have been purchased for as little as $0.01, with part of the proceeds going to charity, and you know what? it was still pirated. The problem is not companies that are greedy, it's pirates who are greedy think they deserve everything for free.

giantpotato said,
it's pirates who are greedy think they deserve everything for free.

It's got nothing to do with what they think they deserve. It's there, it's free, one more pirate can't hurt...

Greedy? sure, but at least they aren't robbing you in the street to get money for a new PS3 game.

giantpotato said,

bull****. The Humble Indie bundle, could have been purchased for as little as $0.01, with part of the proceeds going to charity, and you know what? it was still pirated. The problem is not companies that are greedy, it's pirates who are greedy think they deserve everything for free.

Yup, everyone who pirates is exactly the same psychologically, I suppose that means you think exactly the same way as everyone who doesn't pirate? Get a clue.

Just because The Humble Indie bundle was pirated does not mean that every pirate pirated it.

Some pirates would stop pirating if the prices were cheaper, but some wouldn't, it's not really a simple matter about money. A lot of the times pirating is just easier, you get it in the format you want in the quality you want, when you want it (often released before the official release).

giantpotato said,

bull****. The Humble Indie bundle, could have been purchased for as little as $0.01, with part of the proceeds going to charity, and you know what? it was still pirated. The problem is not companies that are greedy, it's pirates who are greedy think they deserve everything for free.

Way to disprove your own argument! The humble indie bundle made a LOT of money. The fact that it was pirated is irrelevant! They dropped their price and sales shot up, just as the original poster was implying.

First: Anonymous != 4chan
Second: "That fact in itself is ironic, as is 4chan not just censoring the internet to their own standards?" Not really. You can't say that anti-censorship is censorship of censorship. This is a paradox in its very definition.

Lazlo said,
First: Anonymous != 4chan
Second: "That fact in itself is ironic, as is 4chan not just censoring the internet to their own standards?" Not really. You can't say that anti-censorship is censorship of censorship. This is a paradox in its very definition.

Not ironic, just self-righteous to the point of being hypocritical. They think its ok for them to DDoS but not ok for the AiPlex to DDoS, because AiPlex did it first. Just like it was ok for them to harass the woman who harmed that cat, but not ok for the woman to harm the cat, because the woman did it first.

I think the author here is wrong in suggesting we can learn anything from the vendetta. I agree that copyright law has been abused, but I don't need the anon vendetta to tell me that -- in fact it doesn't tell me anything except that anon and 4chan can be as bad as the people they hate (as the author points out).

Lazlo said,
First: Anonymous != 4chan
Second: "That fact in itself is ironic, as is 4chan not just censoring the internet to their own standards?" Not really. You can't say that anti-censorship is censorship of censorship. This is a paradox in its very definition.

+1

brianshapiro said,

Not ironic, just self-righteous to the point of being hypocritical. They think its ok for them to DDoS but not ok for the AiPlex to DDoS, because AiPlex did it first. Just like it was ok for them to harass the woman who harmed that cat, but not ok for the woman to harm the cat, because the woman did it first.

I think the author here is wrong in suggesting we can learn anything from the vendetta. I agree that copyright law has been abused, but I don't need the anon vendetta to tell me that -- in fact it doesn't tell me anything except that anon and 4chan can be as bad as the people they hate (as the author points out).

Actions have consequences, if AiPlex want to take the law into their own hands (e.g taking the site down via DDoS, even if it's just temporary), then they should expect something back. In this case the people targeted were the ones who hired AiPlex, but then, what's the difference?

brianshapiro said,
Not ironic, just self-righteous to the point of being hypocritical.

I'd say it's more a case of "A taste of your own medicine".

I think in cases like these where no physical harm or etc has come to someone, such action is fair when taken against the instigator. It's usually the best "cure" too.

Athernar said,

I'd say it's more a case of "A taste of your own medicine".

I think in cases like these where no physical harm or etc has come to someone, such action is fair when taken against the instigator. It's usually the best "cure" too.

"A taste of your own medicine" is petty and doesn't solve any real world problems.

Anon thought they were the good guys, and AiPlex thought they were the good guys too. Just as much as they didn't cause physical harm, neither did AiPlex, and they think they're on the right side on the issue too. Nobody really got hurt except people who want to download free stuff. Onoz torrents are down

I agree that the RIAA does things that are wrong, and fair use rights have been trampled on, but the way to solve this is to elect people to change laws or to defend rights on courts, not petty turf wars.

The problem with anon/4chan's attitude goes beyond that though; they're so self-righteous they go beyond things like DDoS attacks to getting people harassed. They think they have a right to do whatever they want.

Great article. Well done! I totally agree with everything you wrote.

Speaking of DRM-free... If you are after EDM, you can always check out Beatport, Audiojelly, Juno and similar websites that offer both lossy and lossless qualities of crazy amount of EDM tracks.

For games, you can check out GOG which has all games DRM-free, Direct2Drive that has some DRM-free games (usually the games' pages have this information), and Gamers Gate whose games can be backed up in a DRM-free way, if you know how (totally legal, by the way, you can even ask support to tell you how).

For movies... Well, physical discs... Here is where we fail at digital distribution.

Great write up Alan! I have to agree with you on this and say both parties were a little out of line to take matters into their own hands. You aren't going to stop piracy by taking down the biggest pirating website, it just makes people search for alternatives, spreading out the piracy.
You can't stop it, you can only attempt to control it. I think the RIAA and MPAA are just spreading it, causing an uproar in communities to take matters into their own hands, as no-one is policing the self-proclaimed Internet Police.

Interesting article. I feel that it needs to be mentioned that Anonymous and 4Chan are not the same entity. Anonymous operates independently from 4Chan even though they like to post on 4Chan. More or less the entire title of this article and the content of it should be changed since it was Anonymous and NOT 4Chan.

treemonster said,
+1

these reporters fail to do the basic research every time they write one of these articles as if they actually know what's going on here.

+2

...I'm tired of correcting people when it comes to Anon and 4chan.

s3n4te said,

+3

Neowin is paying them too.

It was organized ON 4chan. Anon may be the group they "rally" under, (which the article states), but it was organized and executed on 4chan.

Brian said,

It was organized ON 4chan. Anon may be the group they "rally" under, (which the article states), but it was organized and executed on 4chan.

By that logic it was Afghanistan that actually attacked us on 9/11...

The article explicitly says it was "4chan's decision". Implicating that it was the sole image board that decided to do so. It should also be noted that Anon rarely organizes on any of the boards but simple calls for reinforcements on boards once some sort of raid has hence been established.

Brian said,

It was organized ON 4chan. Anon may be the group they "rally" under, (which the article states), but it was organized and executed on 4chan.

If I organized a demonstration on Neowin to support molesting children and distributing child pornography would argue the news article should state "Neowin organizes child-moster and kiddy porn party"?

If I contact forum members to participate in a study to support my PHd would you argue the article should be titled "Neowin finds possible mechanism to slow progression Huntington's Disease"

Brian said,
It was organized ON 4chan.
I thought the organizers were acting under the name savetpb were using IRC and 4chan was one of the many places Anon was being notified after any plans were decided.

shhac said,
I thought the organizers were acting under the name savetpb were using IRC and 4chan was one of the many places Anon was being notified after any plans were decided.

Who cares? If the type of raid was propagated on Neowin we would put a stop to it otherwise it would look like we were unofficially endorsing it which 4chan is apt to do. It may say no raids, but it's still a major tool for the organization of Anon.

Brian said,

It was organized ON 4chan. Anon may be the group they "rally" under, (which the article states), but it was organized and executed on 4chan.


did you do the research to find out if it was posted and organized on any other chan as well? IRC channels? so on?

if msn was used to spread word and organize it' then is microsoft just as responsible as 4chan?


Who cares? If the type of raid was propagated on Neowin we would put a stop to it otherwise it would look like we were unofficially endorsing it which 4chan is apt to do. It may say no raids, but it's still a major tool for the organization of Anon.

how would you act anything different as a mod on neowin if such a post were made here? would you delete it? ban the poster? ban the IP? almost instantly so only people who happened to load the page at teh right time saw it? what if the poster was using a botnet and script to spam it over and over again in every subforum of neowin before it got deleted the first time with replies so it would stay at teh top of, and fill the latest post feed box?

4chan mods are pretty good at moderating, deleting posts, banning users and ips, instantly and far faster than forums like neowin can even pretend they would ever do if they got the same kind of posts and traffic and methods of posting things like this.

aside from the fact that the author seems to think that 4chan and anon are one and teh same, when anon uses pretty much every single image board(chan) out there to talk and organize, plus irc channels scattered across every irc server on the globe, plus other forums, plus msn, yahoo im aim,, and so on.
there is no official meeting place of anon, no official method of organizing or communicating. 4chan just simply happens to be the most popular well known place anons posts on, and happens to have anonymous posting. back in teh day FC had anon posting and raids and such, did anon exist back then too?

honestly do a little bit of research, such as reading the articles on anon and 4chan and chanology on each of the wiki's on the net(not a single one of them gives the whole true story). it's something neowin reporters really need to do if they want to keep reporting on 4chan and anon and even unrelated internet happenings such as this.