Talk:RapidShare/Archive 1

Archive 1

Note - RapidShare files can now only be downloaded 10 times

In an effort to stop illegal sharing, the files can only be downloaded up to 10 times —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casket56 (talk • contribs) 23:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

• This is only for free users , A file which has been uploaded from a premium account (while logged in through the webGUI or with the upload application) can be downloaded without this restriction —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.47.22.151 (talk) 01:10, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
  • This is the same for collector's accounts as well, that a file shared on a collector account can be downloaded more than ten times. Haseo9999 (talk) 01:13, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

New download rules

Meanwhile the download rules for free users have changed again (bandwidth adjusts to how busy the servers are). Can someone update the article? 83.76.228.129 (talk) 18:30, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

"Similar Sites"

"An abundance of storage servers based on the "advertisement plus subscriptions" business model are active as of mid-2006. The following servers, along with RapidShare, seem to be the most popular:"

"YouSendIt MegaUpload "

I already changed this and I see it's it's been changed back, I'll tell you why. I have changed it again.. "seem to to be the most popular" is far too vague, and without any external verifiable evidence cited , is just your opinion - what criteria are you using to make this statement? The number of registered users? The number of uploads? Or are you just guessing? Rrose Selavy 20:11, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

"queue time"

This article is POV. For one thing, the wait time isn't "queue" time but an enforced wait to encourage people to sign up to the premium service. Unfortunately I don't have a source for this, but it's fairly evident. - Saul

I think, with "queue time" the editor meant exactly that, just didn't care to explain further because it's quite obvious. I.e:

1. The service provider to try to attempt non-paying users to pay for better service.

2. The service provider to provide non-paying users with sufficient bandwidth.

3. The service provider to do the above while maintaining a business or gaining optimum profit.

--LostPacket

Then presumably it can be referred to as "wait time" without any objections. Rufous 10:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't get any queue any more. Wtf? ^Talk User:Fissionfox 09:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

advert?

Don't you think this article sounds ilke an advert? I'm not sure, if anyone here thinks so, please add the advert tag.Feureau 17:51, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I think the article as a whole is no ad, but I have found a sentence which was "RS is well known for being great, yadda yadda, fighting warez" and I deleted it. Inuyasha 15:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it it kind of like a advert from the fact that in the last 2 categories, RapidShare is referred to as "our" and the fact that I couldn't edit the last 2 parts for some reason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.161.242 (talk) 02:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The question of how to discuss Rapidshare is an interesting one. As others have noted, they are purposefully obscure about some things -- such as the relationship between .com and .de -- and there is precious little independent press coverage of this issue. That said, I consider it valid to have a solid well documented article here; RS is familiar to many, who all ask the question "just what is the deal with Rapidshare?"

If badly edited, this could end up being an advertisement, but that's not how it seems as I read it now. I think that there's a definite information value in providing reliable data about a company that is both high traffic and highly relevant to piracy discussion.

Towards that end, it would be very helpful if someone could add documents from the German court proceedings. . . they are likely to be a source of reliable information. Crocodilian (talk) 19:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Abuse/Copyright

Should we include an explanation on this page (as well as those of similar downloading sites) of the current legal controversy involving them? It is quite easy to bypass these sorts of download sites and download pretty much anything that you want - the RIAA seems to mostly be focusing on the issue of P2P services but Megaupload or Rapidshare.com are far easier and safer. It that encyclopedic? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.131.167.26 (talk) 06:49, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

in my opinion it's a very interesting information and so you should add it - no matter if it's encyclopedic or not

I don't think that this information should be added - this is no hint site for leeching and it is something like an ad. Inuyasha 15:45, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

GEMA, the german "collection society" has obtained "temporary injunctions" against the owners of rapidshare.de and rapidshare.com Article from Heise Online (in English) Nichlas 15:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

.com and .de are two different companies

After going through the hassle of trying to re-up for an account I was informed that they are actually two seperate companies. .com seems a little more customer focus and will respond to a customer .de isn't and will even ignore emails.

This is part of support@rapidshare.de's automated support email:

RapidShare.de and RapidShare.com are completely different companies. It is not possible to use your login, download files, use folders or collector's accounts from RapidShare.com at RapidShare.de (or the other way around).

I'm not sure the best way to put that into the article so I don't want to start editing and have it removed. Anyone have any thoughts? Rapishare.com has bright future then Rapidshare.de

[Unknow user, Unknow date]

---

Whois on RapidShare.de the 19/04/07	Whois on RapidShare.com the 19/04/07
Type: PERSON Name: Christian Schmid Organisation: RapidTec Address: Tullastr. 4a Pcode: 79341 City: Kenzingen Country: DE Changed: 2006-12-09T18:01:43+01:00	[owner-c] handle: 9408709 [owner-c] type: PERSON [owner-c] title: [owner-c] fname: Christian [owner-c] lname: Schmid [owner-c] org: RapidShare AG [owner-c] address: Gewerbestrasse 6 [owner-c] city: Cham [owner-c] pcode: 6330 [owner-c] country: CH [owner-c] state: CH [owner-c] phone: +41-41-7487888 [owner-c] fax: +41-41-7487899 [owner-c] email: support@rapidshare.com [owner-c] protection: SSL [owner-c] updated: 2006-11-26 23:36:18
Image:Rapidshare.de-login-19april2007.PNG	Image:Rapidshare.com-login-19april2007.PNG
Google query "site:www.rapidshare.de www.rapidshare.com" provides no relevant result	"site:www.rapidshare.com www.rapidshare.de" provides no relevant result

This should definitely appear clearly on the article and it is not the case right now as we start with "RapidShare is a company". Well this is not true so the article should start right from the beginning with a disambiguation splitting the .com and .de sites as they are officialy incompatible.

It shows that neither company intend to clarify the situation (especially in the FAQs that both websites possess. It could then be logically considered that the ambiguity has been kept on purpose. This ambiguity multiplies paying accounts benifiting for the owner and is a lie by conscious omisson. The 2 companies are legally distincts ( RapidTec and RapidShare AG ) but the owner Christian Schmid behind them is the same and deliberately keeping accounts incompatible (proofs required). As Sorry, wir sind voll (Update) shows with the screenshot RapidShare.de officially proposed to migrate to the RapidShare.com system. The article also suggest that the 2 companies physically host the files in the same location. By "Selber Inhaber, andere Firma" the article also says that the 2 companies have the same owner.

GEMA erwirkt Etappensieg gegen Rapidshare also shows that the 2 companies were suited at the same time for similar reasons.

I propose to rewrite the article explaining the problem. History also should not be part of the head of the article, only an abstract should be here defining clearly what RapidShare.com (or RapidShare.de in it's own article) is. History could come in the beginning of the article to explain the evolution.

Utopiah 06:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The main article says "On January 19" - a year could be helpful. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.70.15.17 (talk) 23:38, August 20, 2007 (UTC)

Why notability notice?

Who put up a notability notice? A site that Alexa ranks at #11 is certainly notability in itself. :/ Before I get the usual yadda yadda about traffic vs. actual notability, this service is very relevant given its copyright issues and has implications for all one-click file hosting services. Jon914 (talk) 02:01, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

It appears that 58.110.240.135 put up the notice, and has been active in editing pages such as this. I don't really agree with this page being questioned about its notability. It is probably very notable, but the page needs sources, badly. I've just done a cleanup to make it better comply with certain guidlines, but again, good sources are needed so no one will doubt this articles notability. Caster23 ^{talk contribs} 22:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

The notability notice is idiotic. I've removed it. I found this article because I wanted information on this topic, which is what Wikipedia is for. It isn't a playground for Deletionist power trips. Gene Ward Smith (talk) 21:38, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Lock this article

I recommend that this article should be locked due to the amount of vandalism due to the rapidshare site down-time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Allyant (talk • contribs) 18:04, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, i agree, but I think that the page with this comment is qualitywise better:

As of 19 January 2008 16:00 GMT, Rapidshare's servers appear to be offline. There are rumors that Rapidshare has been shut down by the authorities after a court order, however, court records do not reveal any issued Rapidshare court order as of yet. Rapidshare technician Steven Gircham has commented on this issue - "There are rumors concerning attacks made on the Rapidshare.com servers. There are also rumors that Rapidshare has been shut down by a court order. These rumors are false. We would like to apologize to our users and inform them that no data has been lost. There have been some hardware issues as a result of high bandwidth and server overload. We are doing our very best to resolve the hardware issues, and users should expect uptime by midnight tonight (GMT)"

• • We don't need to report on the sites condition. This is an encyclopedia article. It being down is not a big deal unless there was something, from a legal standpoint, that caused it. We are not a news source. Besides, there are no sources anywhere that i have seen that give a reason for the downtime. Caster23 ^{talk contribs} 18:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Servers seem fine at http://rapidshare.de/ ... Nanonic (talk) 18:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Latest article on RS....Down, but not out!

Bold text (unreliable source - do not use) www.postchronicle.com/news/original/article_212125521.shtml

It could possibly be used as a source in the article, although I'm not sure how reliable that particular source is, and it also speaks of 'rumours', which is not what Wikipedia is for.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 20:04, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

German collections agency GEMA have reportedly won a temporary injunction against both RapidShare.de and RapidShare.com, according to a report. The date of the report : 19.01.2007... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.197.52.223 (talk) 21:06, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

RapidShare page

{{editprotected}} Hi !

On the page for RapidShare (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapidshare), it is said : "On 19 January 2007, news broke that German collections agency GEMA had claimed to have won a temporary injunction against both RapidShare.de and RapidShare.com. "The latter is said to have used copyright protected works of GEMA members in an unlawful fashion,".[4] To date RapidShare has claimed not to have any knowledge of the content uploaded by the users and of not being in a position to control the content. Through its injunctions the District Court in Cologne had now however made it clear to the company that the fact that it was the users and not the operator of the services that uploaded the content onto the sites did not, from a legal point of view, lessen the operator’s liability for copyright infringements that occurred within the context of the services, the spokesman added.

Both RapidShare.de and RapidShare.com sites are currently still operating and the consequences, if any, of the claimed injunction have yet to be seen. So far, they have not been sued."

All that is perfectly wrong, the RapidShare system came back late in this evening, after a major network upgrade, that was said by a RapidShare technician... Currently, RapidShare is back, and properly working... Can you delete this troll ?

Thanks

• Hello: That section is in reference to something that happened, coincidently, on this day in 2007. That section has nothing to do with todays downtime. There shouldn't be anything about today's downtime in the article. Thanks for your concern! Caster23 ^{talk contribs} 23:29, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

• • The edit doesn't seem to have agreement. Also, when protection expires in few days, everyone will be able to fix any omissions or unneeded parts. Everyone should be careful, however, to work towards a version that all can accept. — Carl (CBM · talk) 23:51, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Happy Hour

For the first time I noticed downloads from Rapidshare display happy hour and not need captcha's. Have never come across this before and there is no mention in the article. What is it, and when is it? Is it the same global time or regional times?--NeF (talk) 00:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

hmm, I just got this too, the downloads are alot quicker —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.101.101.90 (talk) 23:59, 20 April, 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Coheed56 for adding the information to the article. --NeF (talk) 01:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

FWIW, it's currently 7:40pm EST and I hit a RapidShare Happy Hour - this is not within the window of Happy Hours listed in this article. OH NO! Antelan^talk 23:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

No moreCAPCHAS

rapidshare is now CAPCHA Free 24.79.128.159 Peterparker3000 (talk) 01:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC) 01:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I head this in tech news but figured it was wrong, but so far have seen no captchas, so maybe it's true?!! How awesome is that, now I just hope they reduce the wait times to a sensible level.,-NeF (talk) 02:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Divide Rapidshare.com and Rapidshare.de

These sites are owned by different companies.

Here is the information:
Rapidshare.com:

RapidShare AG | Gewerbestrasse 6 | CH-6330 Cham | Schweiz Tel.: +41 41 748 78 80 | Fax: +41 41 748 78 99

Rapidshare.de:

Christian Schmid Tullastr. 4a 79341 Kenzingen Deutschland

Phone: 0900-RAPID-0 (2 EUR/Min) Fax: +49 0211 15779938 USt-IdNr.: DE209362893

The article has confusing information, since these companies cannot be treated as one. Moreover, it states in the article, "RapidShare has two different websites, but both sites claim to be entirely different organizations and entities". Why are they still treated as one then? --217.117.119.246 (talk) 04:48, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Because they do the same thing, have the same name and the same admin:

.com [owner-c] type: PERSON [owner-c] title: [owner-c] fname: Christian [owner-c] lname: Schmid [owner-c] org: RapidShare AG

.de [Holder] Type: PERSON Name: Christian Schmid Organisation: RapidTec —Preceding unsigned comment added by Msdnmqnd qwuidnqidnq (talk • contribs) 17:58, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

only 10 downlaods for an upload?

Uploading a file to rapidshare now results in a message:

"Your file has been saved and can now be downloaded 10 times. It will be deleted after 90 days without download. If you would like to enable more people to download your file, please transfer it to a free Collector's Account or a Premium Account. For more information, click here."

The 90 days thing isn;t new but only 10 downloads? I've not come across that before. Now you are basically required to create a rapidshare account if you post a rapidshare link on a forum or anywhere where there may be more than a few downloads. -NeF (talk) 02:21, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Critique

Nothing on critique? --80.212.233.250 (talk) 19:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Another change for free users

Today, as a free RS user, I saw the following message when attempting to download:

We regret that currently we have no available slots for free users. Unfortunately you will have to wait 2 minutes, this will allow us to continue to provide our service to our Premium users. Afterwards it will be checked again if you can access the file. If you do not want to wait that long, become Premium member

Please note, the server is not going to check again within the next 2 minutes if downloading is possible again. To provide a fair platform, all user get the same options.

I kept reloading the page, which I clearly had to do, and I kept getting this message. I feel this is a noteworthy addition to the article, but I have been unable to find out when this new "rule" was implemented (and it's interesting that it's not on the News page). Can one of our RS specialists look into this? I don't want to post what might be inaccurate information.(216.15.62.119 (talk) 18:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC))

checking policy

> That decision forced Rapidshare to check all the uploaded files before publishing them.

I think there were different proposals on how they should defeat piracy, because until today they don't check any file upon upload (they also announced to NOT check files in their news, as stated in the article). What they do is to delete complete accounts if infringing files are hosted within this (and get reported), while files without account 'destroy themselves' after 10 downloads. Also, a claim of disclosure seems to be valid for this hoster. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.73.111.160 (talk) 19:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

unofficial search engines

RapidShare does not have an official search feature, but there exists several unofficial search engines. The article used to contain information on unofficial search engines, but another user removed it, citing POV concerns. However, I still think this information should be included. Thoughts? --Ixfd64 (talk) 04:32, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Is it just me

Or does the article (on one of the most visited "websites" in the world) feel a little short? Could there not be something about the people that started the company (usually included in other Wikipedia pages on websites); technical information on the size / structure of their servers (surely they must be some of the busiest in the world - although I could be wrong, as I'm not that computer savvy); a photo of the servers, etc.. Is there no interview anywhere with the founder/s of this site? Think about how much information is stored on the servers of this company. Are they secretive? How much money do they make? I'd be fascinated to find out these facts. Surely there must be some more information on this mammoth (?) cyber-vault? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.153.183 (talk) 18:57, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Reference links...

Hi, I am probably doing this wrong but I tried editing the page and it seems I cannot change the reference links part which is where I spotted a problem.
Seems entry #7 is someones own rapidshare links to a file they uploaded!
People will do anything for those premium points.

Some good points are raised on this page.
Why is it, on wikipedia, the internets encyclopedia there is not even a mention of the scrabble for premium points that has really taken off since rapidshare started it all along with megaupload. No mention of how the site has made a huge impression on the so called warez scene. Historically people would exchange links to crack files and shareware software on the net. Nowadays you will be hard pressed to find any place that has the sharing of such links, sharing any other link destinations other than rapidshare.
People now download the shareware themselves first, and then they upload it to rapidshare along with possibly a crack file. then they share the rapidshare link. They get people to download it, they get premium points for it.
Everything has changed due to the lure of the premium points scheme which some people will do almost anything it seems, to get their free points and build up free premium accounts, sell them too.
None of this is mentioned?
Not really a worthy encyclopedia entry on this company.
78.32.180.59 (talk) 15:34, 26 June 2009 (UTC)Paul H

External links cleanup

I removed these from the external links section since they aren't really compatible with WP:EL, but they look like they could be useful as sources, so I moved them here.

• Rapidshare wins over german collecting society GEMA (2007)
• Rapidshare's future in doubt following legal defeat (2008)
• Rapidshare Future In Danger - German Court Orders File-Hoster To Remove Copyrighted Content Proactively (October 2008)

Siawase (talk) 18:15, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

The first one is dead, but the other two seem okay per WP:ELMAYBE point 5. Pcap ping 00:50, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Indexing sites for RapidHShare

I have added the following to RapidShare.

How ever, independent sites providing content listings are available that allows anybody to obtain a specific URL based on a keyword search. [[[1]]]

This was to avoid readers getting the misconception that it was not possible to "search" RapidShare files, as mentioned in the wiki. Many such indexing sites exist, and allows any non-memeber to search and download files.

My view is that, on being impartial and neurtal, this fact has to be shown.

How ever each time i added this, it was reverted. Lastly i got a warning for vadalism. I beleve that my addition is clarification of an existing fact, along with a refrence, and that it should be added to the RapidShare wiki page

Tidalbobo (talk) 05:44, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with this guy. Both Rapidshare and Megaupload are searchable. Heck, google can even search them. I guess it just has to be a little secret. 120.28.84.115 (talk) 10:44, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Noone is able to search the Rapidshare Database. The Content Listing sites u are talking about grab theyr information from other websites. If u never publish a rapidshare-link, no one will ever be able to find it by searching for it. --77.23.111.109 (talk) 10:47, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

No free slots for users

I got something new. Rapidshare doesn't seem to be offering free slots for users to download stuffs from there.

"There are no more download slots available for free users right now. If you don't want to become a premium member, you might want to try again later." This is what I was trying to download http://rs759.rapidshare.com/files/12455965/_-__2003-08-13_-_Theme___Variations__Ariel_.rm

Thank you. 88.105.38.64 (talk) 18:44, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah this is a pretty big issue right now. It's happening to everyone. Obviously they're trying to reduce the active downloaders, but all the major filehosting communities I am a part of that use RapidShare are switching to MegaUpload. This really needs to be in the article -NeF (talk) 18:45, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I've seen this also. The drop off from RapidShare uploads is amazing. I see only Hotfile and Netload now. 115.64.118.162 (talk) 19:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

For the last week or so I've had no issues with rapidshare. I'm guessing they've reverted back to their old system, I went from being able to download 1 rapidshare file in the matter of hours now being able to queue and download dozens in the matter of a few hours.-NeF (talk) 13:09, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

You should rephrase more neutrally the last sentence of the article : as a matter of fact, you can still download on rapidshare as a premium user, with a bandwith of about 40Kbs/s. So YES Rapidshare ARE trying to funnel their user to paying versions, but only those who believe a free service should be as efficient as a paying one will actually end up creating paying accounts. What's more, and unlike Megaupload, Rapidshare being not ad-funded you can only induce that paying customers are ALSO paying for the free downloads.

Wikipedia is about neutrality, and this article clearly is defavorable to Rapidshare using. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.172.174.4 (talk) 12:33, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

There are "happpy hours" from 2 a.m. to 10 a.m. CET - download then works for free users too. Will543 (talk) 21:42, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I cannot speak for other countries, but at present in the U.S. there are seemingly always servers available for free users, and there is no wait at all between downloads; also no "capchas" to navigate.Only one file may be downloaded at a time. This entry should be amended. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.82.124.65 (talk) 13:21, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Logo colours

Aren't the logo colours too dark? I think so… – Josef Plch, 14. 6. 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 08:04, 14 June 2010 (UTC).

New section on the new webstie

On Monday the 27th of September 2010 Rapidshare renovated its website with the following features:

• New design
• New features

• Rapidcontact
• Waiting lounge

Additionally they updated the RapidPro policy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.201.150 (talk) 14:38, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

The renovation made the site inaccessible to users with early browsers and mightily upset others. (Yes, anecdotal and OR.) Due to the recent changes the site was experiencing much higher than normal e-mail traffic Monday night. JimCubb (talk) 16:52, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Launch date in late 2006?

I thought I saw links to rapidshare.de as early as the summer of 2005, or maybe I just assumed it had been around at least as long as MegaUpload, which was founded in spring 2005. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Julyo (talk • contribs) 14:15, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I have removed that date as unsourced (WP:V). It may be correct in refering to the founding of the company in its current form, but the fact is that Rapidshare was already known as a filehoster in mid-2005 (it is mentioned in a July 2005 article in Village Voice), and btw this Wikipedia article was started in April 2006 (based on the German one, which was started in January 2006).

Regards, HaeB (talk) 18:54, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Rapidshare was first called "ezshare.de", and was launched at least in september 2004, as archive.org can confirm (http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://ezshare.de). And you can also see that ezshare.de redirected to rapidshare.de around 2005.
It was part of a bigger website called rapidtec.de.
His founder has probably called his site ezshare because he had to wait until the domain name rapidshare was available. anontrusozao (talk) 16:42, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Other sites?

File-hosting service and/or some otehr file-hosting services should be listed in the See also section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.176.232.123 (talk) 12:30, 13 January 2011 (UTC) I agree, oron is a major competitor — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.180.28.190 (talk) 04:01, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Rapidshare's .de domain

Hi, I'm an italian member of wikipedia and I'm improving the italian page about Rapidshare. I noticed that the reference #4 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/02/01/idUS198247+01-Feb-2008+PRN20080201) doesn't talk about the previous domain (rapidshare.de). Could someone please check it? Thank you very much.--Wizard95 (talk) 18:41, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Downloadspeed limit

Since October 2012, free users can download like premium users (no speed limit). This is not correct, when you download files you only have 25 kb/s speed as a free-user. --Dersachse95 (talk) 15:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)