All Lucas Entertainment videos from 2009 and later are banned.
Is there a GTRU policy against VPN or Proxy in order to protect from this problem? If not, will that create problems with multiple IPs logging in if the VPN servers are commercial?
We don't allow Proxies, but I have no idea about VPN. I'll leave that for one of our more tech savvy moderators.
The situation is being discussed in the staff section.
Well, I have been totally smoke free for 1 year as of today. 
The mental cravings are still there, but they passes much quicker now. I for several months I haven't reached for cigarettes that aren't there.
No regular user will get punished for uploading banned pictures, as the list is not available to them.
Auto Approval uploaders will get punished since they have full access to the list.
With the exception of Titan Media which we fully ban, the picture ban for some studios only applies to stuff posted on the site and in the forums. You can include them in a torrent without issue.
I like "Swimmer" builds, but I didn't need this to tell me what it was called.
hXXp://extratorrent.com/article/681/closure+of+73+000+blogs+discussed+on+aussie+radio+show.html
Closure of 73,000 Blogs Discussed on Aussie Radio Show
Of course, it couldn’t remain unnoticed that 73,000 blogs got shut down. The news were everywhere, making international headlines, and recently Australia’s radio show “The Fourth Estate” introduced an interview with Drew Wilson on this issue.
The host of the show approached Wilson to discuss the situation after the reason of closing blogs was confirmed by Burst.net, which said it was terrorist related activity. During 17 minutes appearance he expressed his opinion on the question why the closure of 73,000 individual blogs had such a significant impact all over the globe.
The main issue he highlighted was that because it had happened in the US, there were already some implications when it came to hampering free speech, as it’s a highly valued freedom in the country. In addition, when combined with censorship online, it made a storm of controversy, as free speech is the very core basic freedom making the Internet tick.
Drew Wilson was also asked if this story could set a kind of precedent for the future of the digital world and he argued that it really hadn’t been given that Burst.net was the one pulling the plug on the operations of Blogetery. If it was the FBI that ordered the closure of the website in the first place, it could set a precedent, but it was more an administrative thing than anything else.
It doesn’t mean that Burst.net had been incompetent in any way. Imagine yourself a website admin or a host in the United States, facing the FBI saying that somebody or something under your watch seems to be fueling terrorist activities. What would you do in such stressful situation hearing your government knocking on the door?
On the other hand, it doesn’t justify the threat of censorship online, if you recall the recent news from Italy there the local government is clamping down on bloggers and journalists. And that one does have a chance to set a very bad precedent.
However, the rest of the hosting services and other discussion forums in the country should think over this case and decide what they would do if this happens to them. The incident should be edificatory in some way, and the companies are recommended to take the decisions in its light. Of course, it’s great to consider yourself an advocate of free speech, but it’s worth keeping in mind that the US entities have to operate within the frames of US laws.
hXXp://extratorrent.com/article/683/eff+launches+new+webpage+to+help+mass+lawsuit+targets.html
EFF Launches New Webpage to Help Mass Lawsuit Targets
EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) launched a new webpage titled “US Copyright Group vs. The People” which is aimed to help people understand the claims made against them more clearly and view possible ways out. The major intention of the source is to help the targets find legal counsel to help them.
The EFF has always represented public interest groups willing to help thousands of BitTorrent users who have appeared to be targets of a mass P2P lawsuit filed by the US Copyright Group.
To remind you, the USCG, a DC-based law firm, targeted initially over twenty thousand users, accusing them of illegally uploading the indie films “Far Cry,” “Gray Man,” “Uncross the Stars,” or “Call of the Wild 3D,” with adding the Academy Award-winning picture “The Hurt Locker” later, after convincing its producers to join the mass litigation. The law firm offered the targets quick $2500 settlements if they wanted to avoid trial.
Right after the start of the litigation, the EFF issued a call for arms looking for the lawyers willing to help people defend themselves. It later teamed up with Public Citizen and the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) in order to file briefs with DC court, asking the judges to quash subpoenas sent by the USCG. Their main argument was that the US Copyright Group had yet to prove that DC court had jurisdiction over the unidentified defendants.
Now the Electronic Frontier Foundation takes another step in its effort to help those accused by setting up a resource page intended to help people understand what they are being accused of and explore possible ways out. The page “USCG vs. the People” answers many questions asked by the users supposing they are listed in the USCG’s lawsuit or receiving the warning letters from the law firm. The list of lawyers interested in assisting is also posted on the page.
The EFF insists that the law firm is abusing copyright legislation trying to get quick paydays from users with scanty financial resources. The outfit has been concerned about this mass P2P lawsuit since it first emerged this spring, noticing at once that the USCG prefers to ignore or sidestep the fundamental legal protections all the defendants are supposed to be granted. As the copyright legislation is intended to be used largely against commercial infringers, it’s clearly not fair to shake out settlements from common users having few resources to defend themselves.
hXXp://extratorrent.com/article/685/riaa+justifies+spending+millions+to+collect+thousands.html
RIAA Justifies Spending Millions to Collect Thousands
The Record Industry Association of America (RIAA) insists that tax returns make a wrong and misleading conclusion on its strategy of “suing-them-all,” as its major intent of defending the rights of musicians and making people to acquire the content legally is very successful.
Couple of weeks ago it was revealed that the industry has been spending millions of dollars every year to target file-sharers, while the fines they manage to recoup rarely exceed 2% of the total expenses.
The statistics say that the entertainment industry spent about $20 million annually recouping $400,000, and these are only figures from 2006 to 2008, so it’s unknown how much it spent in the previous decade, within the heydays of peer-to-peer networks.
After the public became aware of the figures and couldn’t praise the RIAA for spending so much money to gain so little success (considering that sales of legal content are still declining and peer-to-peer is still rampant), the Record Industry Association of America understood it’s time to defend the expenses.
The outfit argues that the figures revealed are misleading, because the cost of legal fees covers a wide range of costs, such as royalty litigation, DMCA warnings, and lawsuits against unauthorized file-sharing services. Moreover, very often the legal fees span over years, with any resulting victory being calculated later on.
The RIAA explains that drawing any larger conclusions about the efficiency of its anti-piracy attempts would be inaccurate and misleading if based on the single line in its tax documents. Their main goal is not to earn money for the rights owners, but to foster a respect for them and to increase awareness, forcing fans to buy the content legally. Looking from this point, the RIAA thinks its efforts make a real difference.
This explanation sounds rather reasonable, but the RIAA’s expenditures are still very high compared to the amount it recoups, and that is the reason why critics say the astronomically high penalties the industry usually seeks in the legal battle have nothing to do with real damages, but are rather targeted at sending a message to similar infringers.
The only conclusion both the industry and the file-sharers can draw out of this is that the RIAA spends too much on legal fees while recouping so little because it just scares tactics.
That's pretty cool for him to do that.
Well, just because they lean a certain way before they become a Supreme Court justice, doesn't mean they will continue that.
I saw this on the news in the UK and the guy from Google was to slimy for words.
The Google "spokesman" was more interested in doing a Google info-mercial than answering the reporter's questions.
The Supreme Court went against the will of the people in Loving v Virginia, by allowing interracial marriage. A majority of Americans supported banning interracial marriage at the time and now that support is virtually nil.
That being said, the Supreme Court is very much far right centric now, so I don't hold out much hope of a decision in our favor.
hXXp://extratorrent.com/article/675/italian+bloggers+in+danger.html
Italian Bloggers in Danger
If you aren’t Italian, the words “paragraph 29? will most likely mean nothing to you; but if you are, then you should know that it’s a part of a very controversial legislation putting the county’s blogging in danger.
Italian media seem to have been facing major challenges recently. Just another month the Italian press went on a 24h strike protesting so-called “gagging law,” intended to forbid publishing transcripts of listening devices and phone talks. This is combined alongside with anti-wiretapping legislation looking like a positive way to protect privacy. However, many consider the legislation a double-edged sword.
Lately, the protests arose in the Internet against resembling laws that are suspected to harm freedom of the media. For example, the Wiretapping Bill contains a provision in section 1, paragraph 29 saying that written journalists, including bloggers, could face penalties of up to 25,000 euros in case they fail to comply with complaints. In details, people responsible for information sites would be requested to correct posts (and also comments and whatever else there’s on the site) within 2 days from any complaint concerning the site content.
If you at least have a personal blog receiving the slightest feedback, you can instantly understand what kind of effect it would have on journalism in the Internet. You don’t like the content – just send a complaint and it will have to be removed. The Italian news sections like ours will undoubtedly die the next day, because even now if the site gets complaints of any news published, it’s in most cases about being anti-copyright and supporting pirates rather than artists. Once the law is enacted, the damaging effect would be seen at once, as the copyright owners will clamp down the pirate news with their complaints, arguing that the criticism is incorrect and the authors would have to either censor themselves completely or face penalties for “non-compliance.”
The critics also point out that there was supposed to be an amendment, suggesting to lengthen the time and lower the size of penalties ten times, but it never came to be.
Italy is now seeing a movement taking root named “No Gag Law to the Net”, arguing that the Article 1, paragraph 29 violates the free speech right. We’ll hope this kind of legislation neither becomes law in Italy nor spreads around the world.
hXXp://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/tot_killer_tough_guy_RVaUtbHJcYvTIC2JRgtn4M
'Tot killer' a 'tough' guy
The boyfriend of a Shinnecock Indian brutally beat her toddler son to death while trying to toughen him up Sunday night, according to cops.
Pedro Jones, 20, pleaded not guilty to a first-degree manslaughter rap yesterday in Southampton Town Justice Court.
Police said he punched the unidentified 17-month-old to death on the tribe's Southampton reservation. Jones told cops he was "trying to make him act like a boy instead of a little girl."
The victim's grandmother lashed out at Jones yesterday, shouting, "I hope you rot in hell!"
HOLY SHIT!!!! Up to $30,000 to get a boyfriend?!
The odd thing is they are a US that deals solely in $$$$, but they are using a UK bank to process their transactions.
You can find out more here;
hXXp://prop8trialtracker.com/2010/08/04/breaking-prop-8-ruled-unconstitutional/
The homophobes have already started the appeal process.
Asking for or trading invites is not allowed, per the rules.
I have no idea who 90% of them are.
It's a hit and miss sort of thing.
Not all people mind when you post their uploads to other sites, while others hate it with a passion. Just check to see if they said something in the torrent description about it. If they do not say in the description that they do not want you to do it, then go ahead and repost it elsewhere.
As for giving credit, this is another unclear situation. Most people that you get the upload from are not the original uploaders to the internet. While it's nice to ask for upload credit, I never do because I don't want my name associated with countless files floating around the internet so it's easier for me to get busted.
Using all capital letters is considered shouting and it's extremely rude.