Damn, the piracy is getting out of hand - Page 2

Dodge_Sniper · 01-01-2007, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OUZBnd

Trust me, I imagine your opinion will change. Besides, you've been known to flip flop on issues more than kerry. Or maybe that was hurtgen..?

That'd probably be hurtgen, because I don't tend to flip flop on issues. As for your post Sneakie, I hate you. Good God, I wish we had those prices, but hey, I can't get a ride out there, so I'm stuck with the $10 tickets. Hybrid, I think of it this way: I'm not innocent, I've stolen from WalMart or KMart before, but I won't steal from a company I respect, such as the store Hot Topic, I'd rather pay them. Now, I do like almost all movies, but yes, I would rather pay for a movie than steal it online, especially considering I tried it once and almost got caught.

andcuriouser · 01-01-2007, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dodge_Sniper

That'd probably be hurtgen, because I don't tend to flip flop on issues. As for your post Sneakie, I hate you. Good God, I wish we had those prices, but hey, I can't get a ride out there, so I'm stuck with the $10 tickets. Hybrid, I think of it this way: I'm not innocent, I've stolen from WalMart or KMart before, but I won't steal from a company I respect, such as the store Hot Topic, I'd rather pay them. Now, I do like almost all movies, but yes, I would rather pay for a movie than steal it online, especially considering I tried it once and almost got caught.

For me, that kind of devalidates your argument. Either you're against piracy in general, or you're just against piracy on franchises you buy into.

I download music, sure. I also buy the albums. I burn the albums onto CDs so that I don't scratch my original copies. My husband is a musician, so trust me, I can kind of see where artists would get upset about piracy. I'm friends with a lot of local musicians, and they'll tell you that they'd much rather people buy their stuff because they aren't exactly making millions. Piracy hurts the little guys, the ones who aren't famous yet.

But on the same note, most artists don't give a shit.

Dodge_Sniper · 01-01-2007, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dodge_Sniper

That'd probably be hurtgen, because I don't tend to flip flop on issues. As for your post Sneakie, I hate you. Good God, I wish we had those prices, but hey, I can't get a ride out there, so I'm stuck with the $10 tickets. Hybrid, I think of it this way: I'm not innocent, I've stolen from WalMart or KMart before, but I won't steal from a company I respect, such as the store Hot Topic, I'd rather pay them. Now, I do like almost all movies, but yes, I would rather pay for a movie than steal it online, especially considering I tried it once and almost got caught.

That would revalidate my argument. I said I've stolen from WalMart, I never said I stole movies. I could have stolen cigarettes. And stealing a DVD from a store isn't piracy, it's just theft in general.

SilentEyz · 01-01-2007, 08:28 PM

SO???

There is diffrent levels of stealing, and when it is acceptable and not-acceptable.

You steal from Wal-mart, prices get hiked up. You pirate a movie.. Theatre and DVD prices get hiked up.

if pirating or stealing straight out off the shelves. your argument is by pirating movies you are stealing from them.. I see no diffrence then.

lemon · 01-01-2007, 10:16 PM

concerning cds, they need to quit putting sketches on em, as well as not putting lousy filler songs on them...

oh yes, this in turn spawned per-per-song sites, such as itunes.

oh yes, did you hear about the christmas rush on itunes? seems like itunes/apple makes a lot of money on the songs, yet they are unwilling to up their hardware and such to support growing popularity...

wait, arent companies supposed to have policies that allow for growth?

hmm - off track here..

piracy only hurts the lawyers pockets, and those artists that create the songs and bitch about pirating..

Dodge_Sniper · 01-02-2007, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemon

piracy only hurts the lawyers pockets, and those artists that create the songs and bitch about pirating..

Now see, that's complete bullshit, and it's not true. Leigh Whannell and James Wan, the writers of SAW, SAW II, and SAW III, and the directors of SAW are indie film makers, they spent $1 million or even less filming these movies for us, and then we go and pirate the movies, and considering they are indie film makers it can make a dent in their earnings.

NicAuf · 01-02-2007, 09:33 PM

Dodge, I was wondering if you're all up in arms due to the fact that the piracy is of Saw 3? Are you mad just because you love the Saw franchise?

andcuriouser · 01-02-2007, 10:35 PM

Well, I understand how piracy can hurt the small artists.

My husband, for instance. He does his own stuff for friends, doesn't sell it, but he does play with other indie artists. And it's a bitch when these really awesome artists are making next to no money because their stuff is being downloaded.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NicAuf

Dodge, I was wondering if you're all up in arms due to the fact that the piracy is of Saw 3? Are you mad just because you love the Saw franchise?

And I was wondering this too. Saying things like, "well I don't steal from Hot Topic because I respect them"... yeah, okay. Maybe people appreciate Wal-mart. Or Britney Spears. Or whatever. I said it before: you are either against piracy, or you are not. It sounds like you are just up in arms because this is Saw. I'm sure if it were Jennifer Lopez you wouldn't care.

RecklessTim · 01-02-2007, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOriginalJames

Well first. How do you know it's not a legal copy of the movie uploaded? There is no copying going on, no piracy going on. It's a legal copy uploaded to a server being displayed.

That, in effect, is legal. Much like you buying a 10 dollar DVD and inviting your friends over to watch it.

Having a few friends over to watch a movie at your house IS legal. But that's where the line is drawn concerning copyright infringment. If you wish to show movies for any other use or in any other place, you must have a separate license which specifically authorizes such use. Even "performances in 'semipublic' places such as clubs, lodges, factories, summer camps and schools are 'public performances' subject to copyright control."

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOriginalJames

I give copies of CDs I buy to my brother all the time. I give him the CD I bought for 12.99, and he rips it onto his computer, and I take albums from his computer and upload them to mine.

That's perfectly legal.

That's NOT legal. You are allowing your brother access to the music that he has not purchased. That puts you at risk as the one who willingly supplied the music, and your brother for using it. According to copyright law, you CAN as the owner of the music CD, copy it for archival reasons. You can also change it's format to play on a MP3 player, but you must be in possesion of the original CD. That means if you lose your CD collection in a fire, but managed to save your PC with your entire music collection. You are not allowed by copyright law to use that collection without purchasing the CD's that you lost once again. The law gives copyright holders a lot of power. Then can seize your computer. They can get an injunction ordering you to stop. They can get statutory damages in excess of $150,000 per copy or actual damages based upon the total number of copies that can be attributed to the P2P posting (so you can be held liable for all the subsequent downloads). You can be forced to pay their attorney's fees and costs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by White2000GT

I do the same thing. Damn near every CD I own is ripped onto my laptop and a good portion of those songs are uploaded onto my iPod. Oh noes! I'm a pirate! Harrrrrrr!!! Shiver me timbers!

That isn't illegal in any way. As long as you are in possesion of the original CD's that you bought.

TheOriginalJames · 01-02-2007, 11:04 PM

So, by your definition Tim... I would not be allowed to buy a cd, rip it to my brothers laptop so I could listen to it when I'm at his house?

That doesn't make any sense. It's perfectly legal. He didn't rip it off the net from a pirated version, it's from a legit copy.

I'd like you to show me the law, because I call BS on not allowing to rip music onto one or more computers.

RecklessTim · 01-02-2007, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOriginalJames

So, by your definition Tim... I would not be allowed to buy a cd, rip it to my brothers laptop so I could listen to it when I'm at his house?

That doesn't make any sense. It's perfectly legal. He didn't rip it off the net from a pirated version, it's from a legit copy.

I'd like you to show me the law, because I call BS on not allowing to rip music onto one or more computers.

The music industry says that you are allowed to have ripped copies on your computer if YOU are in possesion of the original work. Well, either you have it or he has it. Since both of you are not in possesion of the original CD, he can't legally have a copy on HIS computer. It doesn't matter if you listen to it when you are at his house or not. It isn't your computer at your place of residence.

Quote:

The law is more complicated for sharing music with someone else. Under the copyright "first sale" doctrine, codified in section 109 of the Copyright Act, it's ok for you to loan, or sell a CD that you have bought to a friend, so long as you don't keep a copy (that is, so long as there's only one copy at any time). source

TheOriginalJames · 01-02-2007, 11:54 PM

So by that law, if I have a copy on my desktop and laptop, and then the CD is stolen from my vehicle, that's illegal?

There's the loophole. They can't prove shit anyway.

If the RIAA came after me for something of the such. I'd rip them a new asshole.

Quote:

What is Fair Use?

The US Copyright law represents a bargain. Congress granted certain exclusive rights to creators and authors for a limited time-period, in exchange for which, the public would receive an increase in creative works and expressive ideas which benefit society as a whole. As part of this bargain, US Copyright law recognizes some limitations on the exclusive rights of copyright holders. One of the most important of these is the doctrine of fair use, codified in section 107 of the Copyright Act.
A use of a copyrighted work that is considered to be "fair use" is not infringement. Although there are no automatic classes of fair uses, courts tend to find fair use where there's a socially beneficial use of a copyrighted work. Courts have previously found uses for academic research or education, criticism, news reporting and parody to be fair.
There is no "bright-line" or clear-cut test for deciding which uses are fair. Section 107 of the Copyright statute lists four factors, which judges must balance together on a case-by-case basis to decide if a particular use would be considered fair.

Fair use. He can have the cd on his laptop, and I can have it on mine so when I go to his house and use his laptop, I can listen to the music I purchased.

Loophole, much?

Because...

Quote:

(i) The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes -- Courts are more likely to find fair use where the use is for noncommercial purposes.

(ii) The nature of the copyrighted work -- A particular use is more likely to be fair where the copied work is informational rather than creative or expressive.

RecklessTim · 01-03-2007, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOriginalJames

So by that law, if I have a copy on my desktop and laptop, and then the CD is stolen from my vehicle, that's illegal?

There's the loophole. They can't prove shit anyway.

If the RIAA came after me for something of the such. I'd rip them a new asshole.

Fair use. He can have the cd on his laptop, and I can have it on mine so when I go to his house and use his laptop, I can listen to the music I purchased.

Loophole, much?

Because...

They don't have to prove anything. If you are not in possession of the Original work (CD) then it is illegal for you to have a copy of that work. Otherwise every Tom, Dick and Harry would just say that all of their CD's were stolen and they have every right to have 5,000 songs ripped on their hard drive. There is a difference between what is legal under the letter of the law and what you would be prosecuted for. Having a copy on your brothers computer isn't legal, but they aren't going to come after you for it.

My friends are DJ's with 1,000's of songs. They have all their songs backed up on their computer. They are very careful about keeping all of the original CD's locked up and safe. Because if they are checked, they must prove that they own each and every CD for every song on their computer. If not, it's a $150,000 fine for each song they can't prove they own. That would include any songs that their "brother" copied to their machine so "he" can listen to them when "he" is visiting them.

TheOriginalJames · 01-03-2007, 12:33 AM

But that's just the point. RIAA has to PROVE to the court, beyond a reasonable doubt that I have never owned a legitimate copy of that music that I have on my laptop.

I have a Red hot chili peppers cd on my desktop that I used to own the CD too. But it was stolen and I don't have it anymore.

Considering I have other RHCP cd's on my laptop, they cannot disprove that I didn't own it. Nor could they prove that my brother didn't own it.

That's the thing with a court of law, the burdon of PROOF is on them to provide. If they cannot provide it beyond a reasonable doubt, they cannot win the case.

RecklessTim · 01-03-2007, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOriginalJames

But that's just the point. RIAA has to PROVE to the court, beyond a reasonable doubt that I have never owned a legitimate copy of that music that I have on my laptop.

I have a Red hot chili peppers cd on my desktop that I used to own the CD too. But it was stolen and I don't have it anymore.

Considering I have other RHCP cd's on my laptop, they cannot disprove that I didn't own it. Nor could they prove that my brother didn't own it.

That's the thing with a court of law, the burdon of PROOF is on them to provide. If they cannot provide it beyond a reasonable doubt, they cannot win the case.

Quote:

In many jurisdictions, such as the United States, copyright infringement is a strict liability tort or crime. This means that the plaintiff or prosecutor must only prove that the act of copying or actus reus was committed by the defendant, and need not prove guilty intent or mens rea. Good faith, standing alone, is no defense. source

Quote:

Don't tell me I can't back up my collection! Believe it or not, it depends. If you were to back up your entire music collection on analog cassettes, you'd be in the clear. The Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA) of 1992 makes an explicit exemption for cassette backups. Unfortunately, the AHRA doesn't apply to songs copied to computers. That means, under the strictest interpretations of U.S. copyright law, ripping a song to your computer, then uploading a song to your portable player or copying it to a CD is considered unauthorized and illegal. Of course, there are exceptions. source

There are many sites that deal with copyright law, you just have to be willing to read.

01-01-2007, 08:28 PM	#19
SilentEyz V.I.P User Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 5,619 Tokenz: 1,286	Re: Damn, the piracy is getting out of hand SO??? There is diffrent levels of stealing, and when it is acceptable and not-acceptable. You steal from Wal-mart, prices get hiked up. You pirate a movie.. Theatre and DVD prices get hiked up. if pirating or stealing straight out off the shelves. your argument is by pirating movies you are stealing from them.. I see no diffrence then.

01-01-2007, 10:16 PM	#20
lemon Banned Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 8,514	Re: Damn, the piracy is getting out of hand concerning cds, they need to quit putting sketches on em, as well as not putting lousy filler songs on them... oh yes, this in turn spawned per-per-song sites, such as itunes. oh yes, did you hear about the christmas rush on itunes? seems like itunes/apple makes a lot of money on the songs, yet they are unwilling to up their hardware and such to support growing popularity... wait, arent companies supposed to have policies that allow for growth? hmm - off track here.. piracy only hurts the lawyers pockets, and those artists that create the songs and bitch about pirating..

01-02-2007, 09:33 PM	#22
NicAuf Mr. Kovacs Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Hamel,Illinois Posts: 3,604 Tokenz: 133	Re: Damn, the piracy is getting out of hand Dodge, I was wondering if you're all up in arms due to the fact that the piracy is of Saw 3? Are you mad just because you love the Saw franchise? __________________ The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout "save us!"...and i'll look down, and whisper "no."

01-02-2007, 11:04 PM	#25
TheOriginalJames Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 24,729	Re: Damn, the piracy is getting out of hand So, by your definition Tim... I would not be allowed to buy a cd, rip it to my brothers laptop so I could listen to it when I'm at his house? That doesn't make any sense. It's perfectly legal. He didn't rip it off the net from a pirated version, it's from a legit copy. I'd like you to show me the law, because I call BS on not allowing to rip music onto one or more computers.

01-03-2007, 12:33 AM	#29
TheOriginalJames Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 24,729	Re: Damn, the piracy is getting out of hand But that's just the point. RIAA has to PROVE to the court, beyond a reasonable doubt that I have never owned a legitimate copy of that music that I have on my laptop. I have a Red hot chili peppers cd on my desktop that I used to own the CD too. But it was stolen and I don't have it anymore. Considering I have other RHCP cd's on my laptop, they cannot disprove that I didn't own it. Nor could they prove that my brother didn't own it. That's the thing with a court of law, the burdon of PROOF is on them to provide. If they cannot provide it beyond a reasonable doubt, they cannot win the case. Last edited by TheOriginalJames; 01-03-2007 at 03:08 AM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Damn Animals	SilentEyz	General Discussion	17	01-21-2007 11:05 PM
Damn Money!	Darkstar	Humor	4	11-22-2006 07:53 AM
Surgeon General: 'Second Hand Smoke Kills'	99mustang232	Politics	2	06-29-2006 07:22 PM
Baby's Hand Severed At Chocolate Factory	Mrs Behavin	Politics	9	06-23-2006 03:29 AM
messed up my hand	vshayes	General Discussion	54	01-13-2006 04:09 PM