Tell me more x
, there is a new speed test available. Give it a try, leave feedback!
dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer

Search Topic:
uniqs
12
share rss forum feed


BHNtechXpert
BHN Staff
Premium,VIP
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:161
reply to TamaraB

Re: Good for the RIAA/MPAA

said by TamaraB:

said by BHNtechXpert:

In the case of broadcast television you are at lets say level A whereas someone is licensed to distribute the content might be a level D.

I am not talking about distributing anything, I am talking about my personal right to view something I have paid to view, or listen to. Copyright law has degenerated into something it was never intended to be, and is certainly not compatible with current technology.

When I had my Akai 1/4 inch reel-to-reel tape deck, it was perfectly OK and legal for me to record play-lists on it from my records, or off the radio, (saving the vinyl from wear), and enjoy hours of uninterrupted music for my personal use. The same was true when I bought my first Laser-disk player (Sony Betamax if I recall), and subsequently made backup copies OF THE MOVIES I BOUGHT to VHS tape when that came out, because the 12 inch video disks were fragile.

Before DRM, I could rip my DVDs WHICH I PAID FOR to a hard drive and do the same. Now it seems, copyright has morphed into not so much a "copy" right, but a listening/viewing right. Soon they will want a fee for each time I play a song, or watch a movie I purchased. Greed has driven this way too far, and the backlash towards the entertainment industry is a bitch, and will certainly get worse if they continue on this path.

What I observe, is that over the years, the rights which I have always enjoyed are being taken away. Nobody likes losing something they have always had, and will find ways to retain them.

Bob

You've got this all twisted. Nobody is saying that you can't make your own playlists and play the music or video you LEGALLY own anywhere you want. You cannot however take that work and distribute to friends or on the internet. Nobody is stopping you from doing any of that unless you own an Apple product.

DRM is a thing of the past...we're not quite there yet but we're getting there but it's going to take a bit of social responsibility in the meantime. You can rip your dvds to use on home media system and not violate the law. Where you run into trouble is when you share it on the net with 10000 other people.

Thats the problem the RIAA/MPAA have. They could care less what you do with that media in your own home.
--
"I can’t give you a surefire formula for success, but I can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time."
~ Herbert Bayard Swope


winsyrstrife
River City Bounce
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Brooklyn, NY
Hmmm...so there is an agreement in the fact that Bob should be able to have a copy of a television episode available to him, since he already paid for viewing privileges to that episode via his cable bill.

Where the problem lies, is the method Bob uses to attain a copy of this television episode, which is via P2P. Since most models of this design require sharing on some level, Bob is participating in the illegal distribution aspect of this debate.

Am I understanding correctly?

Now, what about Usenet? There is no required peer relationship in this model. If Bob had downloaded the television episode, he's already paid for viewing privileges to, via Usenet, would that be considered acceptable?
--
"Suddenly everything is fainting, falling from a broken ladder's rung. There's a jolt exhilarating from the phone I'm holding...
I hear the words of what I'll become, how eager the hands that reach for love."
- Blind Melon - New Life


heat84
Bit Torrent Apologist

join:2004-03-11
Fort Lauderdale, FL
said by winsyrstrife:

Hmmm...so there is an agreement in the fact that Bob should be able to have a copy of a television episode available to him, since he already paid for viewing privileges to that episode via his cable bill.

Where the problem lies, is the method Bob uses to attain a copy of this television episode, which is via P2P. Since most models of this design require sharing on some level, Bob is participating in the illegal distribution aspect of this debate.

Am I understanding correctly?

Now, what about Usenet? There is no required peer relationship in this model. If Bob had downloaded the television episode, he's already paid for viewing privileges to, via Usenet, would that be considered acceptable?

Another thing that's assumed is that pirates would buy the products that are in the commercials they're missing. I for one would not. I never buy anything that's advertised on TV unless I'm specifically looking to buy something. So the advertisers lose money with me whether I watch on TV or not. If don't by the products being advertised, I shouldn't be allowed to watch TV?

I assume the Usenet question is sarcastic, but if it isn't, NSP's don't give part of their revenue to the AA's.
--
Bit Torrent is my DVR.