CXM_SplicerLooking at the bigger picture Premium Member join:2011-08-11 NYC |
to 88615298
Re: Devil's advocatePoint taken... but your bias-ness is not in your devils advocate point of view, it is in your hyperbole. Dealing drugs?? Rape?? Come on now...
Your agreement with NormanS is also a little confusing. You are agreeing to how copyright infringement is handled now; if you let someone use your Internet connection knowing they are infringing, you are guilty of contributory infringement. If they use it without your knowledge, you aren't guilty of anything. That is not really a Devil's advocate position.
You also, unfortunately, missed my actual argument: Would your Devil's advocate position then be that the leaders and/or management of a corporation should be held liable for things that go on within their organizations without their knowledge? |
|
|
to 88615298
said by 88615298:basically what I said. Thanks for agreeing. Unlike the others too caught up in hate to see anything logical. There is no hate involved, although accusing people of being hate mongers seems to be the latest trendy tactic when others don't agree with your viewpoint. Pointing at an IP address and screaming INFRINGER is an absurd argument. There are many reasons that an address holder who has NOTHING to do with infringing has his/her IP show up in the flawed techniques the entertainment industry wants to use as a standard. We cannot accept that, we want at least a reasonable amount of proof. If they want the money, they simply must EARN it and prove their case which means going MUCH further than merely identifying an IP address. If they want to remain stupid, lazy, and unskilled they should be sent packing. |
|
|
to Aozora
Re: Geico IP insurancequote: In the online world, the pirated music and movies are of better quality for free. Why pay for lesser quality?
And someone as yourself would pay for the same quality content when given a choice of FREE, or NOT FREE. One of my favorite things to do online is reading how people justify pirating. LMAO |
|
|
to 88615298
Re: Devil's advocatesaid by 88615298 WEP might as well use nothing. Anyways who said anything about criminal? If you are being taken into court over copyright infringement that's CIVIL case. Perhaps you should brush up on your civics before posting. You made the correlation between somebody who's internet get unknowingly used, and somebody that knowingly allows a drug dealer to sell out of their house. The ladder clearly being a criminal act. So you are the one that mentioned criminal actions, which is why I then mentioned it. Before you get overly hostile with people on an internet forum, take the time to re-read your previous posts so you can remember what you typed to other people. There is no reason to be so negative. And yes, WEP is basically nothing. Which is clearly why I mentioned it. Do you think my grandmother knows that WEP "security" isn't very secure? Nope. Should she be grouped into your same category as drug dealers, or somebody that allows drug dealers to sell from her living room? Nope. |
|
moonpuppy (banned) join:2000-08-21 Glen Burnie, MD |
to meeeeeeeeee
said by meeeeeeeeee:Pointing at an IP address and screaming INFRINGER is an absurd argument. There are many reasons that an address holder who has NOTHING to do with infringing has his/her IP show up in the flawed techniques the entertainment industry wants to use as a standard. We cannot accept that, we want at least a reasonable amount of proof. If they want the money, they simply must EARN it and prove their case which means going MUCH further than merely identifying an IP address. If they want to remain stupid, lazy, and unskilled they should be sent packing. This reminds me of a case here in Maryland. Two guys are involved in a drug shipment scheme. At least one works at a shipping company. The sender sends a big box full of weed to an address. Now, the person who lives at that address is not supposed to get the box but it will be intercepted by the guy working at the shipping company. Well, one shipment, he fails to intercept but the cops find out about it and decide to let it go to the address in question. The address belongs to the Mayor of Berwyn Heights (small town.) Instead of taking the box before it gets to the house, they let it get delivered and do an illegal "no knock" warrant against the occupants. (No knock warrants have to be signed off and this one wasn't because it did not meet the criteria.) They go in and slam 3 people (including the elderly mother of the mayor) and kill 2 Labrador Retrievers who ran from the SWAT team. They finally arrested the right people and the police had to settle a massive lawsuit (and the sheriff who authorized this raid lost his bid to become county executive.) » www.washingtonpost.com/w ··· 379.htmlThe point? Just because your info is thought to be part of a crime doesn't make you guilty. |
|
cdruGo Colts MVM join:2003-05-14 Fort Wayne, IN
1 recommendation |
to thegeek
Re: Seriously?Besides, anything longer than 30 seconds is usually never seen anyways. |
|
cdru |
to Camelot One
Re: Depends on how BiTorrent works?said by Camelot One:You would have to manually create the torrent file to share something. Unless you started to download from an existing torrent and then you join the swarming, starting to share the file you're downloading as you download it. It still requires a manual step of clicking the link (or otherwise adding an existing torrent file). |
|
|
to moonpuppy
Re: Devil's advocateHopefully people will begin to sue the copyright trolls and their attorneys and make this kind of nonsense unprofitable. |
|
|
to 88615298
You are making an awful lot of assumptions as usual and you are speaking of a criminal offense (drugs) compared to a civil offense (copyright infringement).
2 words that can go a long way: Plausible Deni-ability |
|
jester121 Premium Member join:2003-08-09 Lake Zurich, IL |
I volunteer........ to do some pro bono (snicker) discovery work for the plaintiffs. Or the defendants. Or maybe the judge can appoint me special master... don't say it.... |
|