Seems like it would be a marketing/distribution effectiveness loss. People hear of the release, want to check it out, but it’s not available to them; the hype falls off. They just lost potential listeners and fans, and wasted marketing/release visibility.

If only they had an option with ad blocking.

Sounds like a broken file, on their end, which is part of the original full file, so the first 200 pages were restorable but not the rest (missing in the file data).

Every other peer: The same 99.9.

What the fuck did I just read.

I hope the judge bans these presumably copyright/DMCA scammers/trolls from participating in the legal system as lawyers.

If the judge asks them to show them the UK film, will they claim they are lost, or will they download the other movies from the supposedly infringing websites and then claim the films are not just titled the same but also look exactly the same? Insane.

It’s probably a loost course.

Links for Fin del Mundo

• https://findelmundo.bandcamp.com/music
• https://www.youtube.com/@lasfindelmundo
• https://music.youtube.com/channel/UCbuNHd8zSeB5oJCiL9Va43w

If labeling buttons “buy” is illegal when it’s not buying to own but subscriptions, “pre-order” should be illegal too. “Ordering a license” doesn’t make much sense between expectation and differentiation to (owning) products.

If buttons are labeled “Rent” and “Schedule Rent”, do you think it would have an impact? Significant impact?

What I dislike about Bandcamp is that the music you bought can disappear from your Bandcamp library/account.

There’s still a need to download everything and make sure you have backups, etc.

“Buy to own”, but only as far as you download it. I was surprised when I learned they can disappear, and indeed had it happen to me. It also means you have to track what you bought differently.