Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Phorm Goes Off The Deep End
Search Topic:
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

Comments on news posted 2009-04-28 08:39:32: Controversial British company Phorm used to be named 121Media and has a history with spyware. ..

AuthorAll Replies


cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN

What's a "privacy pirate"?

If I'm a ship pirate, I take possession of other people's ships and property.

If I'm a movie or music pirate, I infringe on others copyrights (aka "steal") the movie or music.

So using the same logic, a privacy pirate must be someone who steals people's privacy. That sounds much more like Phorm's business model then anyone who is fighting against them (except maybe direct competitors in the exact same industry).


knightmb
Everybody Lies

join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
·AT&T DSL Service

said by cdru See Profile :

If I'm a ship pirate, I take possession of other people's ships and property.

If I'm a movie or music pirate, I infringe on others copyrights (aka "steal") the movie or music.

So using the same logic, a privacy pirate must be someone who steals people's privacy. That sounds much more like Phorm's business model then anyone who is fighting against them (except maybe direct competitors in the exact same industry).
The first one is close, except that pirates don't always steal ships. They can raid them, they just kill everyone for fun, or they can trade. Pirates were those that wanted to get rich and operate outside of whatever established law at the time to get it.

Your second example is invalid though, since everything is a copyright, me just quoting you is infringing on your copyright, but stealing and copying are very two distinct legal terms. I can make a copy of your social security card but that doesn't mean I've stolen your social security number. Just like I can make a copy of a movie, but unless I'm selling copies of it, it's certainly not even in the same legal book as stealing.

Of course, their use of "privacy pirate" is just another misused term meant to confuse those too lazy to check what the topic of discussion is. Pirate and stealing is a fun term to though around today because it's popular and is a way to attack people's emotions rather than encourage them to think critically. We might as well start using more cliche sayings for those that protect privacy like "Justice League of Privacy" to make a silly point.
--
Fight NebuAD and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data


birdfeedr
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
·Verizon FIOS


1 edit
said by knightmb See Profile :

Click here to pollute their data »wanip.org/anti-nebuad/
Is this yours?

Is iFrame mode the default on first visit?

To be a better approach, consider having an introductory page with a link to take the reader to one mode or the other. Explanation of the different modes on the introduction page.

Just a suggestion.

Combine it with Spam Vampire to kill two birds with one stone.

NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC

reply to cdru
said by cdru See Profile :

If I'm a movie or music pirate, I infringe on others copyrights (aka "steal") the movie or music.
Actually, a movie, or music pirate distributes a copyright work without proper authorization. Not quite the same thing as "stealing" property, though it is a harm, and a criminal act.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN

reply to knightmb
said by knightmb See Profile :

The first one is close, except that pirates don't always steal ships. They can raid them, they just kill everyone for fun, or they can trade. Pirates were those that wanted to get rich and operate outside of whatever established law at the time to get it.
Well, if they raid a ship I would say that they are also taking possession of it, at least from an authority standpoint. They may give it back or abandon it, but they are still taking what is not theirs. Similarly, if they just in it for trade, they are still taking what's not theirs.

Your second example is invalid though, since everything is a copyright, me just quoting you is infringing on your copyright,
I agree that everything is automatically covered under a copyright. However you are not infringing on my copyright as your use of it would be covered under fair use. You are commenting/critiquing it which is explicitly allowed under US copyright laws. Plus you also cited the original author.

but stealing and copying are very two distinct legal terms.
Which is why I said infringe on others copyrights. I added "aka 'steal'" with steal in quotes as I know the difference from stealing and copyright infringement.

I can make a copy of your social security card but that doesn't mean I've stolen your social security number. Just like I can make a copy of a movie, but unless I'm selling copies of it, it's certainly not even in the same legal book as stealing.
Legally you are correct. To the layman though, they are almost synonymous. "Stealing" or "copyright infringement", my point still is valid. You are acquiring something without the knowledge and/or permission of the person who owns it.


cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN

reply to NormanS
said by NormanS See Profile :

Actually, a movie, or music pirate distributes a copyright work without proper authorization. Not quite the same thing as "stealing" property, though it is a harm, and a criminal act.
Please point me to any legitimate source that says that distribution is a component of piracy.

As I said in another post, I am fully aware of the difference between copyright infringement and stealing.

NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC

said by cdru See Profile :

Please point me to any legitimate source that says that distribution is a component of piracy.
Did I say, "distribution"? I'm so sorry, I was positive I had stated, "unauthorized distribution".
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN

said by NormanS See Profile :

Did I say, "distribution"? I'm so sorry, I was positive I had stated, "unauthorized distribution".
My sarcasm detector is in the repair shop so I can't tell if you meant it that way or not. Regardless if you meant "distribution" or "unauthorized distribution", either one is not necessary a component of piracy. You can be a pirate without distributing, consumption may be sufficient.

NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
How would one prove piracy based on consumption?

Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

reply to cdru
there has to be some kind of distribution for there to be piracy when talking about IP.

because making copies without giving any away or selling and only keeping for yourself is called fair use.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports


cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN

said by Kearnstd See Profile :

because making copies without giving any away or selling and only keeping for yourself is called fair use.
So you are saying it's perfectly legal under fair use laws to make a copy of a CD or DVD borrowed from the library or Netflix, as long as it's only for personal use? Right. If that lets you sleep better at night.

Please point to the relavent section of the US Code that allows you to make a copy under fair use for personal use?

I think you need to read up on what Fair Use really means.

bsoft

join:2004-03-28
Boulder, CO
·Comcast

I think you need to read up on what case law is.

Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. established that:

the making of individual copies of complete television shows for purposes of time-shifting does not constitute copyright infringement, but is fair use.
Similarly, there are other instances in which making personal copies for fair use is well established, such as "Format-Shifting", e.g. putting a CD on your MP3 player (RIAA v. Diamond Multimedia, 180 F. 3d 1072, 1079, 9th Circ. 1999.).


cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN

said by bsoft See Profile :

I think you need to read up on what case law is.

Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. established that:

the making of individual copies of complete television shows for purposes of time-shifting does not constitute copyright infringement, but is fair use.
Similarly, there are other instances in which making personal copies for fair use is well established, such as "Format-Shifting", e.g. putting a CD on your MP3 player (RIAA v. Diamond Multimedia, 180 F. 3d 1072, 1079, 9th Circ. 1999.).
Please let me clarify. I do agree that time/place/format shifting is usually legal, starting with the Betamax case you linked to.

What I was referring to was obtaining some type of a recording as a rental (from say Blockbuster) or borrowing (from a friend or library) and making a copy of it claiming fair use. That goes beyond what Sony v. Universal decided.

You probably are legally able make a personal copy of a rental or borrowed item while you have possession of the original, but once the original is returned your rights to the copy cease.

NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC

reply to bsoft
TTBMK, if I buy IP on media, I can make a copy, and even "distribute" the copy, as long as I am using my own network for my own ends. I'd like to see them try and prevent me from serving up their IP on my network, from my computer (running TVersity Media Server) to local devices (DirecTV HR-21 receiver and D-Link DSM-510 Media player). It is all related to "personal consumption"; not different from playing the media on this device, or that, on my premises, or even off. However, I am pretty sure I must have the original media in my possession, and that I can't either make the content available publicly (unsecure W-LAN), or charge a fee for viewing/listening (exhibition).

Furthermore, I doubt that making copies from borrowed media is legal, though I suspect it would be difficult to prove a crime, or tort in such a case. Which is a concession to cdru See Profile WRT my comment about "unauthorized distribution".

It isn't easy to specify in fifty words, or less, but it is one thing for me to archive a copy of IP for personal use, from original media, which I own, and possess, but another thing to rip copies from media I don't own, when said media will not be in my possession when I make use of the copy.

And there are probably five thousand legal "gotchas" in that statement.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
Forums » Phorm Goes Off The Deep End


Saturday, 28-Nov 14:00:58 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF