Lokitorrent

ThEdEaDLiVe · **Posted:** Fri Feb 11, 2005 12:38 am **Post subject:** Lokitorrent

Seems loki's sites been shut down also by the mpaa. Idiots who donated all that money will not see any progress out of it. Why are people so gullible.

Check out the mpaa message when you click the link http://www.lokitorrent.com/

fierysky · **Posted:** Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:00 am **Post subject:**

Quote:

One such site that will no longer exist is LokiTorrent?one of the largest BitTorrent host servers. The operator of that site, Edward Webber, agreed to not only pay a substantial settlement with even greater financial penalties for any further such actions, but by Court Order must provide the MPAA with access to and copies of all logs and server data related to his illegal BitTorrent activities, which will provide a roadmap to others who have used LokiTorrent to engage in illegal activities.

http://www.mpaa.org/CurrentReleases/200 ... _FINAL.doc

Sucks for the donators.

ThEdEaDLiVe · **Posted:** Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:29 am **Post subject:**

No way. Good find fierysky

Polityk · **Posted:** Fri Feb 11, 2005 2:08 am **Post subject:**

Quote:

Sixty percent of all movies never recoup their production and marketing costs which average well over $100 million.

Yeah, and this is obviously p2p's fault.

Quote:

Piracy also hurts the hundreds of thousands of individuals whose jobs depend on a vital movie industry, including sound and lighting technicians, carpenters, and theatre and video store employees.

And seriously, I'm sick and tired of their using this ridiculous argument over and over. They should add forklift operators and Chinese restaurant owners to the list, just to make you feel that piracy is a danger to us all, which also means - you and your family and friends.

It seems logical when you think about it - the movie people have less money, they spend less, this way the whole world suffers and this is also why there are so many unemployed people. It is very convincing. So I think I'm going to save us all, and I intend to do it by not downloading another b-movie, which I wouldn't be able to see otherwise because it's not distributed in Poland, and for which I wouldn't be willing to spend my money even if it cost 50 eurocents.

Jesus! I mean, reallly...

TaKYoN · **Posted:** Fri Feb 11, 2005 10:06 am **Post subject:**

Damn, how much did they take in donations before this? I had an arguement by PM over at filelist.org because I said sharing was more important than donating cash.

I had a moan about the fact ppl that donated could skip queues and did not need to keep a good share ratio, otherwise you need to upload a huge amount, but almost all the donators had wanked ratios as they had no incentive to share.

Bah, the boy who ran LokiTorrent had no stones, if that had been me I woulda unpacked the heavy artillery and let em have it.

ThEdEaDLiVe · **Posted:** Fri Feb 11, 2005 1:53 pm **Post subject:**

I think it was around $40,000-$50,000 in donations before it went down. That's staggering for only a couple months of donations

Yeah some sites that have the strict rules about share ratios, no lurking on the site, queue jumping etc. allow those that donate to break all them rules. So then you end up doing all that work of ripping and posting a flick to have bunch of them jump ship when they complete because they've given money to the site. Filesharing don't work that way. Sharing, like you say Tak, is more important than donating.

Chadman · **Posted:** Sat Feb 12, 2005 2:58 am **Post subject:**

Well, the good news, if you're bitter about it, is that all those people who donated are probably the ones that the roadmap will lead to first.

TaKYoN · **Posted:** Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:55 pm **Post subject:**

HA fucking HA. Online donations are stupid, no offense spud, but if you ever asked us, I for one would say no.

spudthedestroyer · **Posted:** Sun Feb 13, 2005 8:29 am **Post subject:**

the flipside is of course that websites don't run on sunshine and lollypops. So remember that you leeching the stuff more often than not costs someone else some money/effort/time, so there's no need to be a complete 'user'

You may be getting stuff for free, but somewhere, someone is paying for the luxury of getting the stuff from the site. As long as no one is making a profit :evil:

Most of the honest people won't ask for something back when its costing them, unless they absolutely have to. It is quite clear if you donate to one of those mass-cattle drives like loki torrent, shareconnector or sharereactor then, well, lets sum it up with a :roll:

. A little bit of common sense helps, people :lol:

Unless your a really heavy user of the site, your better off donating that money to cancer research or something. I really do get surprised when people donate large sums of money to these cattle drives still, I'm wondering why it is, they can't all be heavy users can they?

George Tatum · **Posted:** Sun Feb 13, 2005 4:33 pm **Post subject:**

Three things I wonder about this case:

1. Where the hell are lokitorrent supposed to get the $1m they've been quoted as being fined from?

2. The MPAA have forced lokitorrent to supply their logs which from what I can gather only hold IP addresses and number of MB downloaded/uploaded. How can they prove people weren't sharing Linux ISO's, pre-war blues MP3's etc?

3. Where were lokitorrent based and is this another example of the USA trying to apply their laws worldwide?

Never used the site personally, but I'm curious.

John_Doe · **Posted:** Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:09 pm **Post subject:**

3. Finland, wasn't it?

George Tatum · **Posted:** Sun Feb 13, 2005 5:17 pm **Post subject:**

That's what really annoys me, the Yanks should have no jurisdiction outside the USA. :matrix:

killingjokezzz · **Posted:** Sun Feb 13, 2005 8:16 pm **Post subject:**

I've read that Lokitorrent is (was) actually hosted in Texas, USA.

Lokitorrent

Who is online