r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL | reply to LittlePiggie
Re: Is it illegal to watch tv via torrents?
Please tell that to Tivo. |
|
Fobulous
Premium
join:2002-08-14
Missouri City, TX
clubs: | reply to n1zuk
Not really, you can setup your Torrent to not to upload when downloading. At least Utorrent can do that.. |
|
K Patterson
Premium,MVM
join:2006-03-12
Columbus, OH | reply to r81984
The copyright laws include statutory damages. They don't have to prove actual damage. The statutory damages can be horrendous - many tens of thousands of dollars for each item downloaded. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
 ·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
1 edit | reply to NETSH
I love all the crackpot theories that infringers come up with on this site to justify their behavior.
Summary:
Illegal to download unless copyright holder grants permission;
Illegal to upload unless copyright holder grants permission;
Legal to timeshift (record) TV shows according to the Sony Betamax decision;
Damages are statutory--no requirement to show actual damages. You can get more if you can show greater harm than what the statutories allow.
The above is the law. In reality, you may never get caught. |
|
r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL
 ·magicjack.com
·Cox HSI
·Insight Communicat..
 ·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | Getting a TV recording off the internet is the same thing as getting a TV recording off your dvr. As long as you paid for cable or it was an OTA broadcast how can you be stealing since you have caused them no loss?
--
Democrats are not Socialists any more than Republicans are. |
|
LittlePiggie
Premium
join:2009-09-11
| said by r81984  :Getting a TV recording off the internet is the same thing as getting a TV recording off your dvr. As long as you paid for cable or it was an OTA broadcast how can you be stealing since you have caused them no loss? You cause lose by downloading it because now they can't sell it to you.
Wire tapping equipment is legal to buy, but you can't use it without the other party knowing you are using it (permission).
--
»www.ip-adress.com/ip_tracer/ |
|
r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL
·magicjack.com
·Cox HSI
·Insight Communicat..
·AT&T Midwest
2 edits | said by LittlePiggie :You cause lose by downloading it because now they can't sell it to you. So then a DVR/VCR/DVD Recorder is illegal?
I am not talking about something you would normally buy. I am talking about TV shows that you pay for through cable or that are OTA.
--
Democrats are not Socialists any more than Republicans are. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| reply to r81984
What don't you understand about the copyright holder's rights. They or their authorized agent have the rights to determine what kind of copies can be made. If they authorize torrents or the like, then fine. If they don't then you can be held liable for infringement. It's simple. |
|
r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL | So do they authorized personal recordings or not?
It does not matter if the recording is from your DVR or a torrent, its the same thing.
--
Democrats are not Socialists any more than Republicans are. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| reply to r81984
said by r81984 :said by LittlePiggie :You cause lose by downloading it because now they can't sell it to you. So then a DVR/VCR/DVD Recorder is illegal? I am not talking about something you would normally buy. I am talking about TV shows that you pay for through cable or that are OTA. I already told you that time shifting is legal according to the Sony Betamx case. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| reply to r81984
said by r81984 :So do they authorized personal recordings or not? It does not matter if the recording is from your DVR or a torrent, its the same thing. Are you dense? The copyright holder can absolutely dictate the delivery medium. |
|
r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL
·magicjack.com
·Cox HSI
·Insight Communicat..
·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | reply to Goober
I guess you call "recording" "time shifting".
I just never heard a TV recording called time shifting before.
I guess it should have been called a VCTS instead of a VCR?
Well I can get the "time shifting" from the internet.
Torrents = free DVR
I am talking about TV that I already paid for with my cable bill.
--
Democrats are not Socialists any more than Republicans are. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL | As you will.
I'm getting too old to explain the law to warez kiddees. |
|
r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL | I thought the same thing about you.
I just can't understand why people can say you stole what you already paid for.
--
Democrats are not Socialists any more than Republicans are. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL | I've been an IP attorney for over 15 years. I know the copyright and patent statutes and case law.
And you? |
|
r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL | Great, then please explain how you are doing anything wrong getting a personal backup when you already paid for the TV show?
--
Democrats are not Socialists any more than Republicans are. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| You didn't pay for the TV show. You paid for the right to watch the show and along with that comes the right to timeshift the show.
You are not given the right to get a personal backup copy unless the copyright holder has given you that right.
Why is this so difficult for you to understand? It's a very basic premise. |
|
r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL
1 edit | What is your definition of timeshift??
Because VCRs - record, DVD Recorders - Record, DVRs - Record, computers - record
--
Democrats are not Socialists any more than Republicans are. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
2 edits | Recording a TV program for later viewing.
The Sony Betamax case is the definitive Supreme Court decision in this matter. Read at least the Wikipedia version if you can manage it.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp.···ios,_Inc.
The majority opinion
The Court's 5-4 ruling to reverse the Ninth Circuit in favor of Sony hinged on the possibility that the technology in question had significant non-infringing uses, and that the plaintiffs were unable to prove otherwise.
On the question of whether Sony could be described as "contributing" to copyright infringement, the Court stated:
[There must be] a balance between a copyright holder's legitimate demand for effective - not merely symbolic - protection of the statutory monopoly, and the rights of others freely to engage in substantially unrelated areas of commerce. Accordingly, the sale of copying equipment, like the sale of other articles of commerce, does not constitute contributory infringement if the product is widely used for legitimate, unobjectionable purposes. Indeed, it need merely be capable of substantial noninfringing uses....
The question is thus whether the Betamax is capable of commercially significant noninfringing uses ... one potential use of the Betamax plainly satisfies this standard, however it is understood: private, noncommercial time-shifting in the home. It does so both (A) because respondents have no right to prevent other copyright holders from authorizing it for their programs, and (B) because the District Court's factual findings reveal that even the unauthorized home time-shifting of respondents' programs is legitimate fair use....
If there are millions of owners of VTR's who make copies of televised sports events, religious broadcasts, and educational programs ... and if the proprietors of those programs welcome the practice, the business of supplying the equipment that makes such copying feasible should not be stifled simply because the equipment is used by some individuals to make unauthorized reproductions of respondents' works....
When one considers the nature of a televised copyrighted audiovisual work ... and that time-shifting merely enables a viewer to see such a work which he had been invited to witness in its entirety free of charge, the fact ... that the entire work is reproduced ... does not have its ordinary effect of militating against a finding of fair use.
Combined with noncommercial, nonprofit nature of time-shifting, he concluded that it was indeed a fair use. |
|
r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL
1 edit | I paid for my cable TV and I get my "timeshift" for later viewing from the internet instead of my DVR, DVD recorder, or VCR.
--
Democrats are not Socialists any more than Republicans are. |
|
