Talk:Warez scene

message: The intro to this article just plain sucks.
"Members of this scene are often unaware that the expression "the scene" is also used by members of other social groups to describe their community(who cares about this statement?), for example in the arts or music or literature(should be "for example, in the arts, music or literature) . This use of the expression "the scene" has been in continual use in English for a long time before software even existed("...long before software existed" might work, but again, what is the point of this statement?) . Members of a social group know what "the scene"(the Scene or The Scene, but quotations aren't useful).  refers to, and most members of the software community use it to refer to all the software-related communities listed above. In the rest of this article "the scene" means the software scene(no shit.)."
I really think this needs to be rewritten.  Not only does it go off into pointless directions, but it sounds like it's written by a kid.  I don't want to rewrite it because I'm not familiar enough with the material, but I would hope someone well informed could do better.
I just had an idea... why don't we incorporate into this article a list of various sets of scene rules? For example, we could have different headings, SVCD, VCD, Software, 0-day etc and give some of the rules, where rule is defined as something that must be followed to avoid nuking. For example...
This whole article (including this talk section) is so full of misinformation that it is hard to know where to begin. Maybe the only real way to learn is to be a part of the scene.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.134.34.208 (talk) 10:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you know the rules then surely add them and any other information you think to be useful. This article is a stub after all and could use more descriptive information to help people better understand the topic. --Kamasutra 20:43, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: January 2008

message: In the same way users constantly tried to cover up OiNK.cd's existence on wikipedia, we see it here.  Misinformation, as another user put it, is prevalent and is sickening.  Also, one of the most popular interests is the scene in music and pre-releases.  This article skirts around every mention.  I know people love the scene, and everything it provides, but wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and this IS supposed to be informative.  I suggest a dialogue about this article.  I realize, in the same way acquaintances of mine dealt with AfD's fot shot down and hit the news stands, I would be fighting an uphill battle in editing this page heavily without conversation first.  Please discuss and offer opinions.
66.71.40.153 (talk) 21:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: This Article is purposely cyclical

message: If they ban anyone who leaks a release why does every single tvshow/film/album/software, that anyone cares about, make it to regular P2P networks? Surely all leakers would have been banned by now? Maybe someone can clear this up. --84.67.30.155 15:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Simply put, the idiot who wrote this wikipedia article does not know shit.  Everything is leaked.  It ends up on torrent sites.  FxP boards.  DC++.  It spreads like wild fire. --216.59.246.148 20:40, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think a more important question is: is there an insistence on internal releases only or is leaking to the outside world punished somehow? NeoThe1 05:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ANTIP2P 

message: Here is an external link with a lot of info about the scene.. maybe it can be added to external links: http://www.aboutthescene.com/
Correction
Contrary to popular belief The Scene does distribute to p2p networks should be "Contrary to popular belief The Scene does NOT distribute to p2p networks" --65.12.196.204 22:03, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complete info 

message: 1. What's up with the whole warez stuff? -- The scene is not all that much about warez as this article makes it to be. While modern groups do form by wanabes who distribute warez, the original Scene had nothing to do with it. Saying The Scene was all about warez is like saying dynamite is all about terrorists... e.g. It's Simply Modern Misuse. ... as is evident from the unclear relationship between the evolution of the demoscene from the Scene and all these anti-warez arrests taking place.
2. EFNET = The Scene?! What the... -- The Scene if anything is not limited to any one network nor does the majority of it belong to a specific network. Yes, EFNet is a technical network where you do have a fair chance of meeting a member of The Scene (asif there was an explicit defenition of such a person), the community is made of People and is not bound to any particular Internet protocol, much less IRC ... as is obvious from the unclear transition between BBSes around the world and a relatively young Internet IRC network like EFNet.
3. Distribution -- If we're talking about crack&keygen-makers, let the one most important thing be perfectly clear: They DO NOT distribute what they make. Period. If you ever see a group out there working on distributing the stuff, know that they're wannabees who rip other people's work and distribute it online as their own. The respect for authorship of software/artwork of individual groups has always been a core element of the rules in all aspects and varieties of The Scene.
4. Demoscene & Abandonware -- Obvious inconsistency. Demoscene is about creating compact digital artpieces, abandonware is about distributing old software, would somebody please explain to me in who's wild fantasy could these two things branch off the same thing? The entire text under that subsection isn't even making sense: What exactly are "cracked executables" supposed to be.
:: I recall that the demo scene really took off after the Amiga's "bouncing ball" demo.  Until that time, moving many bytes around on the screen caused a lot of flickering, and the Amiga demo didn't flicker.  People were inspired.  (It wasn't the first demo, though.  There was a cool multicolor Atari logo demo.)  What really made the demos take off were the improved graphics capabilities of the Amiga and Atari ST computers - before them, video games really pushed the limits of the hardware, but by the late 80s, the systems were powerful enough that fewer and fewer games required the programmers to really squeeze performance.  Demos emerged because programmers focusing on performance, could produce artwork that surpassed video games' multimedia.  Additionally, demos usually involved collaboration between programmers, musicians, and artists.66.245.192.47 (talk) 06:43, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There all done. Please somebody correct my spelling. --DustWolf 19:10, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

text: The problem with this article that it has no references at all. If it had at least some, then we could regard this article as something other than one person's opinion or conception. Mstuomel 12:13, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  One problem: How exactly does one cite references in the describtion of a community that makes a point on not providing them? --89.212.75.6 17:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Various well known news sites have atleast mentioned the demoscene and the warez scene. There's been TV documentaries, magazine articles etc. Finding them from the Internet is unlikely. What you can find in English and on the net are for example Slashdot news and press releases and documents released by the agencies that have done busts related to warez scene in the past. There's been statements taken from busted people that might contain something referenceable, finding these might prove challenging though as it was many years ago I saw these. Place to start digging:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Copyright_enforcement  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.93.183 (talk) 02:54, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Should  I specifically mention there is no explict connection between warez and the Scene community? Anyway, I'll look for something sometime I guess. --89.212.75.6 17:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mixing apples and oranges 

message: "The scene has no central leadership, location, ruleset, or other conventional distinguishing marks of existence" 
Uh, I see a whole lot of rules in the piracy scene.  The demand of releases in BIN/CUE format rather than ISO, splitting releases into 15 or 50 MB Rar archives, .nfo content descriptors, and a number of other clearly set rules of release and habit that failure to obey will result in ostracizing by the rest of the scene and the release marked as "nuked" on most websites and sources of releases. Saying the software scene lacks rulesets or distinguishing marks isn't really correct, wouldn't you say? 71.175.122.95 (talk) 08:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is more to the scene than piracy... as you might have noticed if you ever read the article. While your favorite warez site may have admins, The Scene, the abstract notion that it is, does not. --194.249.198.32 (talk) 19:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The rules are not very abstract at all -- see Standard (warez). If you want to say that there are no rules for membership, that is different than saying there are "no rules". Besides, while the Scene itself might not have rules for membership, most of the groups in the Scene do. But that's also a different matter. Ham Pastrami (talk) 11:27, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: No rules?

message: Currently, the Warez section of the Scene article contains essentially nothing but a link to Topsite (warez), which should be an article on servers containing pirated content.
In the introductory paragraph of Topsite (warez) page, there is a link to a description of what the Warez Scene is... (just a link to The Scene). I was intending to flesh out the Warez Scene page, but there's no place for it. So I'm proposing that the Warez Scene is split off.
67.165.213.199 (talk) 23:49, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, doh, I'll just move the danged thing to Warez (scene), as Warez scene already exists as a redirect, nuke out the artscene and demoscene parts, and create a redirect on The Scene, as spoken on the above section. Anonymous editor, check out this old version of the Warez scene article to see if you can recover some material, please. People interested on working on the "scene kids" thing should go improve the text at 2000s_in_fashion#Scene (see first my comment at Talk:2000s_in_fashion#Removal_of_text) --Enric Naval (talk) 00:12, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Yes, it's possible. I encourage you to simply write it yourself, this is what wikis are for, after all :) . Just add a sub-section to the History section called "post-90s" or something and explain the changes there at length. Then go to the lead and add a short paragraph making a short summary of the changes. I'll take a look when it's done to fix stuff and try to find sources. --Enric Naval (talk) 15:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split off warez scene 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
* Support as this is not a form of warez. 76.66.193.90 (talk) 04:27, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: I can't believe this piece of rubbish is actually being linked to from reputable entries such as Matroska. For pete's sake, good editors are wasting their time trying to fix this shit; will someone please bury it once and for all? I'd love to enumerate each hideously-written, inane, childish, embarassing, half-baked blunder but a) many have already done so and b) I'm losing the will to live just thinking about it. Blitterbug (talk) 13:17, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Utter Bollocks 

message: Seriously?  No article on piracy/cracks/keygens can be considered balanced or informative if it doesn't properly cite "warez" as a principal source of cyber-infections.  Furthermore, no article on this "scene" is complete without examining the motivations for spreading such infections.
72.91.31.23 (talk) 13:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The warez scene doesn't spread malware with its releases. If so, those releases would be nuked. Trojans and other malware you are referring to can be added later by third parties much further down the piracy chain, but it has nothing to do with the scene itself. Note: keygens and cracks can be detected as being malicious by virus scanners. This is because often the same packing techniques are used as those for viruses. The same issues can be observed with demos from the demoscene. --Ondertitel (talk) 14:12, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Reference for the above: https://torrentfreak.com/piracy-release-group-has-been-spying-on-downloaders-for-9-months-131111/ A proper discussion can be found in the Warez article. Ondertitel (talk) 14:26, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of malware??? 

message: Hi: I'm a new user and firstly I'd like to congratulate all of you for your splendid work. The reason why I am writing: The objection about the article being too technical seems to me dubious. I totally disagree, and not in regard to this article but to any article of a technical-scientific matter. My statement: the public may not be considered foolish, uneducated or uninformed, except in the article subject and up to a certain measure. There is a whole cross reference system in Wikipedia. Of course, there must be articles basic enough to give the reader the language necessary to understand articles with more sophiscated contents. And a criterium to establish categories. Example: easier category: Electromagnetism: this article, assuming it exists, is so general it must use not too technical a language. Links within the article can increase the level of technicality in the associated articles. This is my opinion, which simply put is: let us not make Wikipedia a children's enciclopaedia. 
Stf92 (talk) 01:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Les us not make Wikipedia a children's enciclopaedia. 

message: "The Warez scene, mostly referred to as The Scene (often capitalized),[1] is an underground community of people that specialize in the distribution of copyrighted material, including television shows and series, movies, music, music videos, games (all platforms), applications (all platforms), ebooks, and pornography."
The problem is that the warez scene is more than just the scene. The warez scene also includes both private and public p2p sites that are not part of the scene, for instance. As an example to illustrate why this sentence is simply stupid: The Pirate Bay is part of the warez scene, but not the scene. 
The second problem is that both people inside and outside of the scene never use the phrase "the warez scene" to describe the scene.
So my suggestion is to simply name this article "the scene", and drop the phrase all together.
: Problem one: can you give a citation? I can't. When 'warez scene' is used, it is always meant to be just the scene. Your illustrative sentence is wrong. In the same context, 'warez scene' is equivalent with 'the scene', but the scene can also mean the demo or art scene. Then there are also all the other non computer related scenes.
: Problem two: you're wrong. Books, published academic papers and ex-sceners themselves contradict you:
:* http://books.google.be/books?id=cA3qL9PBR0kC&pg=PA2&dq=%22warez+scene%22
:* http://pdf.textfiles.com/academics/politicscc-rehn.pdf
:* http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/c451i/iama_ex_warez_scene_member_ama/
:Your suggestion is not possible because that article already exists as a disambiguation page. --Ondertitel (talk) 14:06, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  article is stupid 

message: Since we won't be able to put everything in the further reading section until it's used, I'll keep a list here. --Ondertitel (talk) 17:17, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: Seriously? Go to any Usenet indexer or torrent tracker. Releases, releases,... thousands millions of them. Nearly everything is here. You may fail to get the pirated contents only if it's too old and not very popular (You will still find the releases, but there are no seeders, dead links, incomplete archives etc). Yes, downloading warez isn't such easy as just clicking and watching/playing and you may be fined and many people prefers to pay some moneys to feel yourself in safety and convenience. But technically you may still get, I think, 99% of media/games/soft without paying a cent and without being a member of the Scene :). And it's good :).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.116.48.105 (talk) 06:21, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The Scene is meant to be hidden from the public, only being shared with those within the community" 

message: At some point during the existence of The Scene, there was a 'web series' named Behind The Scene that consisted of video of text chats between Scene members. It was almost certainly made by actual scene members, as it depicted usernames that were very similar to those of members - names that didn't become public until after an FBI sting operation and the arrest of several Scene members (and the series included the username of the FBI mole too). It also showed the conversations and processes for the leak of several films, including The Hulk (2003) and Troy (2004) in its early episodes.
Unfortunately, I cannot find that series online, or any mention of it, as the relevant Google keywords are flooded with later results. But if anyone can find reference to it, it would be great to include in the article, as it is almost a realtime documentary about The Scene. Otherwise, the only surviving reference to it might be this discussion post. There is a short video from 2002 about the demoscene named "Demographics: Behind The Scene", which is very different and unrelated, it just happens to have a similar name. Chris45215 (talk) 17:24, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Web series that depicted The Scene, and the online conversations between members.