dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
11
share rss forum feed

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
reply to Rekrul

Re: extortion

What bearing does this have on the discussion? Is your assertion that copyright protection ends as soon as legal means to obtain or view the content is no longer offered?


JRW2
R.I.P. Mom, Brian, Ziggy, Max and Zen.
Premium
join:2004-12-20
La La Land
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
said by rradina:

What bearing does this have on the discussion? Is your assertion that copyright protection ends as soon as legal means to obtain or view the content is no longer offered?

OK, what about the person who holds a LEGAL copy of a movie/tv show/CD, that is damaged, and no longer available for purchase.....
What about that person, are they illegally downloading a copy of a "work" they legally own???
--
RIAA/MPAA... Bite me!!!!
In constant search for intelligent life on Earth!

frdrizzt

join:2008-05-03
Ronkonkoma, NY
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
said by JRW2:

said by rradina:

What bearing does this have on the discussion? Is your assertion that copyright protection ends as soon as legal means to obtain or view the content is no longer offered?

OK, what about the person who holds a LEGAL copy of a movie/tv show/CD, that is damaged, and no longer available for purchase.....
What about that person, are they illegally downloading a copy of a "work" they legally own???

You are allowed to make backup copies of things you legally own, but I don't believe that you have a right to download a copy of something you have. However, that is really a moot point, because most notices I read about come from a user uploading said content, not downloading. You definitely do not have the right to distribute copyright material even if you do own it.

Rekrul

join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT
reply to rradina
said by rradina:

What bearing does this have on the discussion? Is your assertion that copyright protection ends as soon as legal means to obtain or view the content is no longer offered?

I was responding to a message that claimed that people just didn't want to pay for things. I was pointing out that it's not that simple. If the studios don't want me to pirate these things, where are my legal options to buy them?

said by rradina:

Is your assertion that copyright protection ends as soon as legal means to obtain or view the content is no longer offered?

If nobody is offering a particular bit of content for sale, how are they harmed if people share it for free?

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
reply to JRW2
Yes.

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
reply to Rekrul
Come on. Get real and be serious. This is just silly. Copyright holders are under no obligation to sell copies of their work. The fact that they don't want to sell copies doesn't invalid their hold on the copyright. Disney periodically offers their "classics" for sale but only for a limited time. If you miss their offer, that doesn't mean it's a free for all.

Turn this around and get real. If you created something and held a copyright and for whatever reason didn't want to sell copies, do you want folks stealing from you?

This issue isn't at all about any of this shit. For crying out loud, just stop it. The significance here is the fact that the ISPs and content owners have decided to create some sort of sidebar court system because the copyright holders weren't finding satisfaction in the normal court system. Nothing more, nothing less. There's nothing about this development that changes any of the landscape regarding whether or not it's justified or right to copy something that you don't own or already own but think you are entitled to something that may or may not be fair or right but that's the law.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to frdrizzt
said by frdrizzt:

You are allowed to make backup copies of things you legally own,

Bzzzzt. Wrong guess. They took that away years ago. You're not allowed to backup anything unless they specifically say you can.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:5
said by KrK:

said by frdrizzt:

You are allowed to make backup copies of things you legally own,

Bzzzzt. Wrong guess. They took that away years ago. You're not allowed to backup anything unless they specifically say you can.

That's what I used to think too, and a real IP attorney on this site pointed me to some new regs that allow you to make backups under fair use. A single backup per item, if I recall. This is for the USA.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Interesting. How do they get around the "It's a crime to circumnavigate a copy protection scheme" clause of the DMCA?

An example would be DVD. You're allowed to make a backup copy BUT not allowed to decode to actually make the copy.

So it's legal to HAVE a backup just illegal to actually MAKE a backup, if you get my drift.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:5
Correct.

As a practical matter no one is going after you for making personal backups with DVDcrypt or other similar tools.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Nope, but they do go after the people who make said tools and shut them down, sue them, and charge them with enabling copyright infringement.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:5
said by KrK:

Nope, but they do go after the people who make said tools and shut them down, sue them, and charge them with enabling copyright infringement.

Correct. And, factually, they are doing exactly what they are charged with. This goes along with my reality check on what's happening here. The RIAA/MPAA/content owners are not, generally, going after individual violators one at a time. They go with mass letters (which haven't worked out all that well for them, publicity-wise), and they go after the enablers -- the Napsters, Limewires, Pirate Bays of the world, and those who build the pirating tools and disseminate them.

And frankly, they don't care about individual violators as long as they do it within their personal domain (e.g. ripping DVDs) and don't get on the Internet to do it.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Ah, but they do go after individuals all the time. That's what this is all about....

MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:5
said by KrK:

Ah, but they do go after individuals all the time. That's what this is all about....

Yes but it's been mass letters to hundreds or thousands of people, not one-at-a-time, which was my point.