this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2023
17 points (77.4% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54609 readers
563 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is accurate.
Just downloading/consuming isn't the illegal part. It's why you hear about torrent users getting ISP notices, but not people who download from usenet or watch pirate sports streams.
Why not? Because ISP don't snitch on you in case of illegal streaming? The owner of the content must catch you in order to make legal procedures, right? And what about usenet, I've read about it but I didn't get it? Can you brief it out? How it similar to torrents and how it's different?
Correct. ISPs aren't monitoring for this stuff. They're responding to complaints they get from copyright owners. With torrents, anyone in downloading the file can see IPs for everyone they're downloading from. That's how companies get IPs to follow up on, and why VPNs protect you (they'd just the IP of a VPN server). They then compile lists of these IPs, send to ISPs, who are then compelled by the courts to send letters and eventually disconnect you if you get caught again.
With streaming sites, the only one seeing your IP is the host of the site. Of course they're not going to snitch, since you're just watching the illegal stream they've made available. They're the ones breaking the law in that case, you're just watching a public stream. Obviously, you're not expected to know whether every video on youtube was uploaded by the copyright owner. Instead, the onus for that falls on the uploader and host.
Super high level: there's two external parts, an indexer and a usenet provider. The indexer indexes .nzb files that serve as references to file locations on the usernet provider. Practically speaking, it maps pretty closely to .torrent files and the actual content you're grabbing from peers, respectively. The important difference here is that the usenet providers host the content, rather than a bunch of random people (which can include corporate attorneys looking to contact your ISP).
Locally, you still use a client piece of software to download. You can send it a .nzb, and assuming it's configured correctly with your usenet provider(s), will download the content.
Other important differences: 1. usenet indexers and providers are going to cost money, unlike torrenting. They tend to be pretty reasonable if you're downloading a lot though. 2. Because the providers are more centralized than torrents, there's some quirks. Retention is a factor, and generally the older something is, the harder it'll be to find (or more expensive plan you'll need with your provider), and not all providers have everything (so heavier users may need multiple providers to cover all their needs). A single good provider covers like 99% of what I need though.