The Rush Limbaugh Show 13-May-10 CF mp3

The Rush Limbaugh Show 13-May-10 CF mp3 Podcasts RSS Feed: http://rss.thepiratebay.se/user/0953dad117d831b657cbd898e8411b78

udp://tracker.openbittorrent.com:80
udp://open.demonii.com:1337
udp://tracker.coppersurfer.tk:6969
udp://exodus.desync.com:6969

fizdude (2010-05-14)

J, you're definitely da man!! Thanks!!!

thunderbum (2010-05-14)

Thanks again!

booboo332 (2010-05-14)

Thanks.

gordonl (2010-05-14)

Most excellent.

trickdaddy0024 (2010-05-14)

I found this on another website...Bugaboo you should read this...END
Risks of File-Sharing
Who this tut is for - There have been a lot of threads lately from worried P2P users who have either received a DMCA letter or are concerned about getting one in the future. Hopefully, after reading this tut the average P2P user will have a better understanding of the real risks of file-sharing and how to better minimize these risks.
The following is aimed at file sharers from the USA since these laws include the most severe action in general when it comes to prosecution or civil action against alleged sharers of copyrighted materials. Still, if these guidelines are used then one is most likely safer in any other country as well. I will not be citing resources here as I feel it is best that others research this information on their own. Also I encourage readers to scrutinize the following information and if found to be outdated, incorrect or just lacking something important to please post it and I will update if necessary.
Criminal and civil risks of file sharing ? Title 17. 506 (a) states:
Quote:
(a) Criminal Infringement.?
(1) In general.? Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed?
(A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;
(B) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180?day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000; or
© by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution.
Note* that © is later defined further to include
Quote:
(A) a computer program, a musical work, a motion picture or other audiovisual work, or a sound recording, if, at the time of unauthorized distribution?
(i) the copyright owner has a reasonable expectation of commercial distribution; and
(ii) the copies or phonorecords of the work have not been commercially distributed; or
(B) a motion picture, if, at the time of unauthorized distribution, the motion picture?
(i) has been made available for viewing in a motion picture exhibition facility; and
(ii) has not been made available in copies for sale to the general public in the United States in a format intended to permit viewing outside a motion picture exhibition facility.
So to summarize, if you do not distribute for profit, do not reproduce(share) more than $1000 worth of copyrighted materials within a six month period, or share anything that is not yet available (but soon will be) for retail sale, you are not a criminal! Otherwise you could potentially be charged and sentenced with up to 5 years in prison and some fines (not more than $2500 I think it was).
Under the DMCA provisions, a person who rips a DVD/CD that has any sort of a protection against copying (like DRM) can be convicted and sentenced to up to 5 years prison and $500,000 in fines. The same severe punishment goes for anyone who changes or removes the following from © material; title, name of author, name of performers, terms and conditions, numbers or symbols referring to such information. After reading these amendments I assume that anyone who has received a DMCA violation notice did so after a torrent of © material was uploaded from and primarily seeded on the IP# that they use. This would cause a © owner to presume that the person who made the said torrent circumvented © protection that was originally included with the material. A presumption is hardly enough to take legal action. The evidence needed to show that a suspect has circumvented © protection would require not only the presence of the circumvented material (say on a HD), but it would also need to include evidence that the suspect is responsible for the circumvention.
In addition to criminal charges, or perhaps alternative

booboo332 (2010-05-14)

Holy shit, littletrick used actual paragraphs! Oh wait, I guess copy and paste doesn't count.
Nothing I haven't read before and it only proves my point. It's a copyright issue not theft.
If anyone out there is truly worried about getting in trouble over using bittorrent I recommend looking into usenet. While not posted as promptly as jwhitt's torrent you can find Rush's show there.
The usenet is not as convenient as bittorrent but there is no uploading or revealing your ip address to the world. Some isps, like mine, have there own servers and include access to the newsgroups for free while others will need to sign up to a premium service.
You can find a lot of information, tutorials and links to recommended apps and premium service providers here:
http://www.slyck.com/