smuth Posted September 6, 2009 CID Share Posted September 6, 2009 ok ok so can i conclude laws doesnt progress with the speed of technologies. anyway bush aint in total power anymore. dictatorship in amrica is over Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zalternate Posted September 6, 2009 CID Share Posted September 6, 2009 anyway bush aint in total power anymore. dictatorship in amrica is over Have you ever heard the phrase, "The heads of government may change, but the workers of the Government continue on with the same ways that they were told to do with the last Government, unless forcibly and publicly told to change their ways." Many Governments have been slowed down and some toppled(at the next election), due to the workers of the government being sticks in the wheel of change. Since workers are a Democrat or a Republican and some have a tendency to work better and faster, when their political party is in charge. So maybe by next year, the Government may kick HomeLand Insecurity in the nutsack, to better respect the people of the land. Maybe. And I guess George W. Bush better not leave Texas either. http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/04/mann.george.w.bush/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudmanc4 Posted September 6, 2009 CID Share Posted September 6, 2009 So this thread ends up talking about a past president going to jail for there decisions ? wow, what a way to discuss stealing someone else's work because they think the price is to high. It's so much easier to steal, then move the conversation away from the criminal. Fact is if any of those that steal someone else's creation ever actually made something themselves that was worth something to someone else, and that was stolen, well now the tables would be turned now wouldn't they. But that wont ever happen with most thieves, they'd much rather see something setting there that they think they can get away with, steal it, then say things to shift the blame, what a joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smuth Posted September 6, 2009 CID Share Posted September 6, 2009 its free, thats all of it. its just zalternate mention something drooping on ISPs, its fucken the same technology, the only thing they got what? warrant? i dont snoop on someone sending love to his mother-in-law downtown new york. :grin: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommie gorman Posted September 6, 2009 CID Share Posted September 6, 2009 ok ok so can i conclude laws doesnt progress with the speed of technologies. anyway bush aint in total power anymore. dictatorship in amrica is over Yee of little knowledge, Bush was a lightweight in comparison to Obama. I wish you well on that one. Just wait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zalternate Posted September 6, 2009 CID Share Posted September 6, 2009 So this thread ends up talking about a past president going to jail for there decisions ? wow, what a way to discuss stealing someone else's work because they think the price is to high. It's so much easier to steal, then move the conversation away from the criminal. File sharing is a deep subject. It goes beyond just the CopyRight Mafia. How many countries are disconnecting users on just a 'complaint' by the Mafia of file sharing?(3 strikes and you're out). In Law, the only way you could be disconnected(or to stop a temporary disconnect) is with an actual court appearance to state your case and have the Mafia bring up their factual evidence of wrong doing. And none of this Tribunal bull shiat either. Thats not a court system. I've seen some news from Europe, about how if you have an open WiFi in your home, you are guilty of a crime, since someone could use that connection to do stuff. I have said over time about if the product is good enough to buy, then buy it. Or a Donation to the creator. Some musicians are making a decent living with the 'Pay what you think the musics worth' campaign. Some musicians are trying to get their music rights back from the corporate machine. I don't file share, but then again, I don't purchase a music CD that is mostly filler. I'm not like that guy at the garage sale who buys the whole bicycle to just get the seat from it. And then throws the rest of the bicycle in the dumpster. Look at YouTube and all the old taped shows that make it on there. Are they copyright infringing? Well the uploading users look at it like the fact that some of these old shows are not put out on DVD. So they share to the rest of the Internet. Even some newer shows are on there. Canceled before their time and no DVD's to be had of them. Look at 'WKRP', a show that does have some DVD's out, but the music on the show is the biggest problem for the releases. Read the Amazon Editor review of how the music has been altered, to comply with copyright. And the extra 10 bucks a DVD season compared to other shows. http://www.amazon.com/WKRP-Cincinnati-Complete-First-Season/dp/B000MXPE6U Because of pesky music rights, the songs don't remain the same. "Hot Blooded" is not playing when mild-mannered newsman Les Nessman (Richard Sanders) puts on a toupee in anticipation of an awards-dinner date with bombshell station receptionist Jennifer (Loni Anderson). It's "Beautiful Dreamer" and not "Fly Me to the Moon" that chimes when Jennifer's doorbell is sounded. Any number of generic songs have replaced the contemporary and classic rock so vital to WKRP, I tried to watch a full clip of 'Married with Children' on a Canadian TV website(Global). The starting music(ugggg) of "Love and Marriage" was replaced with some strange instrumental music. Copyright crap in action... With software, there is a ton of Open Source stuff. Some of it is great and some of it needs to be more developed before release to the mass's. Once again, it's donate if you like the product or even give a review to make the product better. Even the big corporations release old versions for free. But with the note of 'use at your own risk', with no support for it. Why someone needs to crack a massive online player game CD/DVD to be able to play it online is strange. There is even Windows Lite out there. Which I guess is mostly for people who have the Windows key, but due to a Mother Board death with an OEM version, they lose their purchased OS on the system, if outside of warranty. Or their original CD/DVD that broke and the copy protection didn't allow the user to make a legitimate backup for protective purposes. But with Smuth mentioning the dictatorship under the Bush administration, makes ya wonder just how many things happen with warrant-less wire tapping in the digital realm. You can't Tap a phone without a warrant, but for some reason you can Tap a VOIP connection without a warrant. They are both phones, but since one is via the Internet....... Lets look at DPI. In Canada, our lame Privacy Commissioner was looking into it for Privacy concerns. Since DPI can do a lot more than just slow down file sharing traffic(like help record all your Internet data). Rogers Internet is busy modifying webpages with Rogers Ad's/service notices. How do you know that the webpage you are viewing has not been modified to be more Canadian content approved? Oh but you can opt-out. Even though legally, it should be opt-in. DNS redirection is the crime. And it breaks the Internet. I read a post on another forum, about how the users attempt to go to Google.com was rerouted to Rogers/Yahoo search page. Or was it just a glitch, and it did go away after a few hours. But emails were sent to the Google to advice them of the error. Who's worse? Rogers Internet or Google? Many would say Rogers. Can the Government read your snail mail? Nope. Can the Government read your Emails? Sure why not. It's on the Internet, so no 'Internet laws' preventing them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudmanc4 Posted September 6, 2009 CID Share Posted September 6, 2009 Sure file sharing is a multifaceted subject, but seems to be that people cloud the reason it's become so much of an issue. And that is not because someone d/l a Linux version that was put there because there free, other then the commercially versions that come with support. Or is it due to people sharing there personal files (pis ect.. ) between friends and family members or the dozens of other treasons behind legit file sharing via torrents. This is an issue because just like when people went into the music stores and boosted cd's cassettes ect. , but it's much easier now, just click, and there face isnt on a camera. So the true person comes out, a thief ! There's more thieves in this world then anything else, or this would not be a problem. And it needs to be stopped. You steal, then you lose your connection, simple as that. Stop it right there. You want to fight the fact that you stole and lost your connection, cool, take that to the court system, see what a jury of your peers has to say about it. There are clear lines drawn , and there not something that is written in all these music industry "mafia" , each person knows better then to take something that is not there's, they know it, and they do it because they think there getting something for free. At someone elses cost. You cant justify theft by mucking up the conversation with technicalities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zalternate Posted September 6, 2009 CID Share Posted September 6, 2009 Was just reading a story on 'District 9' and the million or so downloads of a DVD quality version, in 24 hours. At least the movie was made with a reasonable budget of 30 million dollars. So they have made a decent profit. A hundred grand at the theaters, was pulled in. But a million DVD copies equals about, at roughly $30 per copy, well $30 million. Plus gas, tickets and tolls to get it. Don't know how much of a cut, the makers of the movie get from each disc. There is a battle on release times for movie DVD's. But second class movie theaters don't want the DVD release to be in a months time from the original showing. But rarely do the Feds ever find the person who released the original copy into the Torrent world. And if they find the person, is there any real jail time? Some companies try to mark the copies, but I'd guess some of these copies are from pre-made to market DVD's. So is that another outsourced company in China? Remember the days when someone went into the theater with a video camera? And made the most crappy copy around. Music Concerts tried to ban video cameras. Then along came camera phones....... The comment from the story of the user who can't wait for the DVD release is just being lazy. http://torrentfreak.com/pirates-jump-on-district-9-torrents-090906/ Pirates Jump on District 9 Torrents Written by Ernesto on September 06, 2009 With over a million downloads in less than 24 hours, Peter Jackson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smuth Posted September 6, 2009 CID Share Posted September 6, 2009 it aint my job to pay. hhahahahahahaaaa not even taxes :evil6: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommie gorman Posted September 7, 2009 CID Share Posted September 7, 2009 Again, the law on the internet is chaning daily. As it should, it is not the same as the land. Or others like Zalt said would not be able to do different theirselves. And to be honest, it was not stolen. It was offered for download, and I recieved stolen goods (if I downloaded it) . Thats a different law even on the land. And like Zalt said, it requires going to curt to be against the law in the first place, and the RIAA again thinks they are above the law. Or maybe even higher. And everyone knows the artists recieve mere % of pennies on the dollar of collected money that way from the RIAA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdawnaz Posted September 7, 2009 CID Share Posted September 7, 2009 it aint my job to pay. hhahahahahahaaaa not even taxes :evil6: oh okay... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommie gorman Posted September 7, 2009 CID Share Posted September 7, 2009 Hes right in a way momma, not til they have him busting rocks. Taxes are inevitable. And its cheaper to pay them, and the interest penalties they impose as soon as they catch you, and you'll get no mercy for not paying those. Been there and done that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdawnaz Posted September 7, 2009 CID Share Posted September 7, 2009 i just thought it was funny that he'd come out and say that...label himself that way...like it was something to be proud of...hey lookie me i'm a crook all the way to the federal level...HEY!!! wait...now that i think of it... smuth...u should write the pres and apply for a seat on his cabinet... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommie gorman Posted September 7, 2009 CID Share Posted September 7, 2009 i just thought it was funny that he'd come out and say that...label himself that way...like it was something to be proud of...hey lookie me i'm a crook all the way to the federal level...HEY!!! wait...now that i think of it... smuth...u should write the pres and apply for a seat on his cabinet... Maybe he's already on the cabinet :2funny: :2funny: Where do you work smuth? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudmanc4 Posted September 7, 2009 CID Share Posted September 7, 2009 Fact is , it's become so much a part of internet usage , that people don't really think of it in the same way as walking into a store and shoplifting, but it is, it's the same thing. When they get an example made of, it's like people root for the thief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdawnaz Posted September 7, 2009 CID Share Posted September 7, 2009 Fact is , it's become so much a part of internet usage , that people don't really think of it in the same way as walking into a store and shoplifting, but it is, it's the same thing. When they get an example made of, it's like people root for the thief. exactly...theft is against the law...stealing someone elses artwork is a crime... and no once the crime has been comitted and the authorities (the riaa) step in and impose fines sure the artist still doesn't get squat...but the artist would get paid what they are due if people would just pay the buck in the first place (i don't actually know what it costs...i just listen to the radio...i don't download anything...but if i did i would pay for it) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zalternate Posted September 7, 2009 CID Share Posted September 7, 2009 .i just listen to the radio...i don't download anything...but if i did i would pay for it As long as no one else can hear the radio, otherwise thats a public performance and you owe the CopyRight Mafia more money. The CopyRight Mafia did say having the radio on in the office is a 'public performance'. Even though Judges disagree. http://www.google.com/webhp#hl=en&source=hp&q=office+radio+public+performance&aq=f&aqi=&oq=&fp=d9ca629f83f82f8a Ah. Heres the link to one story from the UK. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090327/1113014276.shtml PRS Threatens Woman For Playing Radio To Her Horses Without Paying A Licensing Fee from the this-is-called-extortion dept When I was in the UK recently, I was surprised to hear just how much most folks hate PRS -- the collections society in charge of getting various businesses to pay for playing music. PRS is also the group that has caused music videos to be pulled from YouTube after demanding much more money than was economically feasible. But, where PRS really shines is in threatening tons of small businesses. Over the years, we've had stories on PRS threatening car repair shops, because mechanics in the garage were playing their radios loud enough that customers in the waiting room could hear them. That's a public performance, according to PRS. Then they went after a police station because some cops were listening to radios. Then they went after a children's charity for singing Christmas carols without paying up. The group has even been known to call up small businesses and if they hear music in the background, demand payment, including one case involving a guy working at home with his dog. Apparently, that constitutes a "public performance." The latest (sent in by a few folks) is that PRS has now threatened a woman who plays classical music to her horses in her stable to keep them calm. She had been turning on the local classical music station, saying that it helped keep the horse calm -- but PRS is demanding Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTB Posted September 7, 2009 CID Share Posted September 7, 2009 exactly...theft is against the law...stealing someone elses artwork is a crime... and no once the crime has been comitted and the authorities (the riaa) step in and impose fines sure the artist still doesn't get squat...but the artist would get paid what they are due if people would just pay the buck in the first place (i don't actually know what it costs...i just listen to the radio...i don't download anything...but if i did i would pay for it) Point 1: Look up the definition of theft. Downloading copyrighted works is a violation of copyright, not a crime. Point 2: The RIAA has as much power as you and me, if it wasn't for their money. They are NOT the authorities. They would make you pay for just listening to the radio if they could, never mind the fact they're already being paid twice or more for every song played. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zalternate Posted September 7, 2009 CID Share Posted September 7, 2009 Point 1: Look up the definition of theft. Downloading copyrighted works is a violation of copyright, not a crime. Thats an interesting point, which this Wiki article from the UK defines. So the plaintiff calls in the police on 'false grounds'(which is actually a court punishable offense. But since it's the UK....). The police find no 'trademark infringement'. But the Plaintiff uses the situation to further their own goals in an apparently illegal way. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation_Against_Copyright_Theft ..................Also in 2007, FACT, in collaboration with UK police, took down well known hot-linking site Tv-links.co.uk. FACT makes the claim that the 26 year old man from Cheltenham was arrested in connection with offences relating to the facilitation of copyright infringement on the internet whereas the arrest was over a matter of possible trademark infringement, though no such infringement appears to have taken place[1][2]. While arrested under Section 92 of the Trade Marks Act 1994 he has now been released 'pending further investigation' with no charges filed against him as of 25 October. [2][3] Strangely, Section 92 of the Trade Marks Act 1994 deals with falsely applying signs to goods that may be mistaken for a registered trademark, something which the website did not do [4]. In June 2009, FACT brought a lawsuit against the company Scopelight and its founders for running a video search engine called Surfthechannel.com. The organisation accompanied a police raid on the Scopelights owners homes, they collaborated with the police in the initial investigation and they allowed FACT employee's to inspect confiscated computers and the information on them. After a few months the police decided there was not enough evidence to prosecute the owners for criminal charges. Scopelight's owners requested their property back to which FACT refused claiming they were holding onto the equipment to be used for a civil case against the owners. The issue was brought to court and it was ruled that FACT's actions were improper and the equipment should have been returned the moment police decided not to prosecute the owners of Scopelight.................... http://www.legalcybertips.com/Copyrights/Is-Copyright-Violation-A-Crime.html Is Copyright Violation A Crime Copyright violation, also known as copyright infringement, can be explained as unauthorized or unlawful use of any material that is protected under the copyright law. Any activity that violates the exclusive rights of the copyright owner including reproducing, performing, duplicating or making derivative works of the original copyright work is considered as copyright violation. .................. As per the United States Copyright Law, any person who willingly violates a copyright is punishable under the law. However, the punishment only involves imposing penalties towards monetary damages caused as a result of copyright violation committed by the infringer. The court can also issue injunction notice against any infringement that might happen in the future. In most cases, a copyright violation is prosecuted through private lawsuits filed by the copyright holder or those who have been granted exclusive license on the copyright. All the issues related to copyright violation come under the civil lawsuit and it is not possible to initiate any criminal proceedings in these types of situations. In order to initiate any legal proceedings regarding copyright violation, it is important to have evidence in the form of documents. It is important to prove that the infringer has violated the copyright law with the objective of gaining commercial advantage. It is also necessary to establish that the work was reproduced and was being prepared for commercial distribution by electronic means. The underlined part is interesting. Since most file sharing is for recreational use and not for commercial gain. Even though giving something away for free is an advantage(but not commercially based). Some more sites. http://www.google.com/webhp#hl=en&source=hp&q=copyright+violation+crime&aq=f&aqi=g1&oq=&fp=d9ca629f83f82f8a So we need a law that says if you copyright infringe, it would be a misdemeanor. Maybe someone could Email the Cyber Czar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudmanc4 Posted September 7, 2009 CID Share Posted September 7, 2009 Point 1: Look up the definition of theft. Downloading copyrighted works is a violation of copyright, not a crime. Point 2: The RIAA has as much power as you and me, if it wasn't for their money. They are NOT the authorities. They would make you pay for just listening to the radio if they could, never mind the fact they're already being paid twice or more for every song played. That is an interesting point, and one hell of a twist on taking something that isnt yours :haha: Now that the wording has changed by law of stealing / theft , whatever, they can proceed to the next level, whatever that is :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommie gorman Posted September 8, 2009 CID Share Posted September 8, 2009 PRS Threatens Woman For Playing Radio To Her Horses Without Paying A Licensing Fee from the this-is-called-extortion dept When I was in the UK recently, I was surprised to hear just how much most folks hate PRS -- the collections society in charge of getting various businesses to pay for playing music. PRS is also the group that has caused music videos to be pulled from YouTube after demanding much more money than was economically feasible. But, where PRS really shines is in threatening tons of small businesses. Over the years, we've had stories on PRS threatening car repair shops, because mechanics in the garage were playing their radios loud enough that customers in the waiting room could hear them. That's a public performance, according to PRS. Then they went after a police station because some cops were listening to radios. Then they went after a children's charity for singing Christmas carols without paying up. The group has even been known to call up small businesses and if they hear music in the background, demand payment, including one case involving a guy working at home with his dog. Apparently, that constitutes a "public performance." The latest (sent in by a few folks) is that PRS has now threatened a woman who plays classical music to her horses in her stable to keep them calm. She had been turning on the local classical music station, saying that it helped keep the horse calm -- but PRS is demanding Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zalternate Posted September 8, 2009 CID Share Posted September 8, 2009 And honestly between you me and the wall I hope one day the RIAA ends up falling. Maybe your wish gets granted. This is so freaking awesome. An Artist smacks the recording industry in the nut sack. He had a deal for 7 albums, but Sony decides to make a 8th album(outside of contract), out of unreleased material that they were just holding on to. http://torrentfreak.com/sony-music-office-raided-090907/ Pirated Artist Orders Police Raid on Sony Music Office Written by Ernesto on September 08, 2009 A Sony Music office in Mexico has been raided after the label refused to hand over the recordings of one of Latin America Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommie gorman Posted September 8, 2009 CID Share Posted September 8, 2009 Maybe your wish gets granted. Yeah, one day for sure. They do fight hard though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coknuck Posted September 8, 2009 CID Share Posted September 8, 2009 All those with out internet sin cast the first stone! Otherwise shut the fuck up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudmanc4 Posted September 8, 2009 CID Share Posted September 8, 2009 All those with out internet sin cast the first stone! Otherwise shut the fuck up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 It's not the point coknuck, as for me I wouldn't and say I never d/l'd something I shouldn't have , that would be a blatant lie, what I am saying is that how people try and justify there theft, it's just plain ridiculous. All you hear when this comes up is how FCC, RIAA, blah blah whatever does all this crap they shouldn't so somehow it makes it "ok" to take something, because someone else made it either more expensive then they wanted to pay, or bundled something that they were forced to take along with one song, and all the other BS that people bring up that has nothing to do with what they did. Granted all these so called "mafia" organizations that rape and pillage the true artists seriously are in need for a smack down, and the way it looks , the only ones who will be able to do anything about it, is the artists themselves. Now I read zalternates post where someone cant talk sports ? Gimmie a break, this is nothing more then an infringement on the first amendment! This from directly out of my pocket constitution that is tattered from daily use showing people that there lives are being changed , and there voting for it ! ~~ "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to peacefully assemble and to petition the government for redress of grievances. " So this crap is unconstitutional ! Simple as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.