Lawyers will handle the rest. We're not interested in piracy, just very very good UI/UX. Stay tuned.
[1] We use Gaug.es and Piwik with IP fuzzing. They provide enough high-level metrics so that we can improve the interface while letting you guys off the hook.
> Not doing ads, tracking you, trying to sell your data elsewhere: check
With the absence of a "not" there, it's not quite clear whether you're telling the truth or not, but a http request to "track.gif" could be construed as, you know, tracking us.
Sure you are. You're directly helping people perform it. I'm not saying what you're doing should be illegal, but let's be honest here. You are "interested" in piracy. One could argue you're even involved in it.
> Sure you are. You're directly helping people perform it. I'm not saying what you're doing should be illegal, but let's be honest here. You are "interested" in piracy. One could argue you're even involved in it.
To be, again, completely honest with you, no. If you could have that much exposure showing photos of shoes, we'd do it instead.
I see it as... a start-up without the worry to make profit. We use analytics only to improve the product. We use this as a product building exercise, that's all.
We don't upload movies, we don't run a tracker, we don't belong to any release groups: that's how not interested in piracy we are.
> We don't upload movies, we don't run a tracker, we don't belong to
> any release groups: that's how not interested in piracy we are.
That's like saying "We don't sell crystal meth, we're not distributors for crystal meth, we don't belong to any drug production groups, but our site helps kids obtain crystal meth from those who do: that's how not interested in crystal meth we are."
Your analogy is paired because both piracy and meth are illegal in the USA. However, the pairing lacks equivalence in my view because crystal meth is clearly (and by nature, not by law) harmful to the user, while piracy is not.
A better analogy might be a website that helps others circumvent the Great Firewall of China. It is illegal in one particular country, but circumvention does not harm individuals (only the society, one could argue). "We don't circumvent the wall, we don't run a proxy, we don't belong to tor: that's how not interested in circumventing the wall we are."
"crystal meth is clearly (and by nature, not by law) harmful to the user, while piracy is not"
Methamphetamine is helpful for hyperactivity, obesity, and narcolepsy.
I am having trouble constructing parameters in which your statement is true, but does not apply to nearly everything. For example, Tylenol (APAP) is clearly harmful to a user's liver.
Your censorship analogy is flawed, since copyright infringement is not legal in any country (im not sure, but Ethiopia might have started recognising foreign copyrights now)
>since copyright infringement is not legal in any country //
Last time I looked there were still a few countries that weren't signatories to international copyright laws, PNG I think was one? Maybe Nauru, Tuvalu, Vatican City?
http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/summary.jsp gives details of those places that aren't party to _international_ IP treaties. Note Vatican City is in that list as "Holy See" and is a signatory to a few IP treaties.
I find your comment disingenuous. I cannot take you seriously when you argue that you are not "interested" in the very thing you enable and are focused on.
I can see why you would think that. However, if there were APIs to license all that content on an invidual basis instead of linking to torrents, we'd do it instead. Can't really argue beyond that, you're right to some extent.
A friend of mine runs a similar site for music [1]. I can't be sure, but I'm fairly certain he didn't do it because he was interested in pirating music (at least not entirely). He did it because he saw that others were interested in pirating music (er, finding links to music that may or may not be pirated), and that a service helping them do that would be useful/appreciated(/get him noticed).
> With the absence of a "not" there, it's not quite clear whether you're telling the truth or not, but a http request to "track.gif" could be construed as, you know, tracking us.
Fair point, reworded the above to be more precise.
cf. http://hackerne.ws/item?id=4054800, and you're absolutely right. We're working on reduce pain points, TV shows is an even more interesting challenge.
Suddenly we live in a world where you need to go to a rights holder to reference an image for discussion or non-profit display? The law may be divided on the issue, but I'm not.
It's a typical Rails 3 apps, Nokogiri used for scraping, PostgreSQL db (migrated from SQLite originally), jQuery+ui for the aucomplete (lazy, yay!), and that's about it :)
Impressive. Your autocomplete suggestions are high quality, even in foreign languages. May I ask how you are ranking suggestions results? It can't simply be the TMDB api, right?
![http://secure.gaug.es/track.gif?h[site_id]=4fb448ea613f5d5be...](http://secure.gaug.es/track.gif?h[site_id]=4fb448ea613f5d5be100000e&h[resource]=http%3A%2F%2Fmovies.io%2Fm%2F1m&h[referrer]=http%3A%2F%2Fmovies.io%2Fi%2Ftop50&h[title]=Project%20X%20(2012)%20%7C%20movies.io&h[user_agent]=Mozilla%2F5.0%20(Macintosh%3B%20Intel%20Mac%20OS%20X%2010.6%3B%20rv%3A12.0)%20Gecko%2F20100101%20Firefox%2F12.0&h[unique]=0&h[unique_hour]=0&h[unique_day]=0&h[unique_month]=0&h[unique_year]=0&h[screenx]=1920&h[browserx]=1920&h[browsery]=594×tamp=1338576974951){kind=link}