 birdfeedrPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
kudos:8
2 edits | Obligatory rant from Tennessee To save some of the effort and repetition,
• Only copyright infringers will receive the notices.
• Everybody who uses torrents are pirating something.
• If you pay for content, that's what you're supposed to do.
• Content producers have the right to control access.
• Anyone who wants something different than what the studios/labels want are pirates.
• You only have rights to view/play the content. You do not own it.
Now that these points are made up front, they don't need to be repeated endlessly.
Did I miss one? 
[edit to add]
• It's against ISP TOS, therefore safe harbor provision can be selectively enforced.
• Enforcement action is merely "educational" and short term, so it doesn't have lasting effect if you aren't a pirate.
• Defending yourself for $35 is worth it if you aren't a pirate, since only pirates will get notices.
• If you do nothing wrong, you won't get a notice.
• You are responsible for your internet connection. You need to monitor your kids and Thanksgiving houseguests.
• Wireless security is your responsibility. You deserve a notice if your wireless is hijacked.
• If you make it to 5 notices, whatever happens is your fault.
• The system will have no false positives. If you're tagged, it's real.
• Don't sweat it until you get a notice. Then you get to take action. After all, you have 5 more to go.
• Most people who claim innocence, are not really. |
|
 ptrowskiGot Helix?Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4 | Seriously laughed and spit out my water. Thanks. |
|
Kamus
join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX | reply to birdfeedr
said by birdfeedr:To save some of the effort and repetition,
Only copyright infringers will receive the notices.
So pretty much everyone? (though there are some people that actually believe they have never, ever infringed copyright)
But i guess if you infringe copyright on YouTube they'll let that one go.
Verizon (and other ISP's as well) has never been really serious about their high speed offerings as they are artificially inflated. They would have no problem in offering much higher speeds to their entry level plans, but they choose not to do it anyway.
And just to show they could do it. They do offer much higher speeds just for bragging rights. This is evident by the fact that it's priced just high enough so most people never consider getting it, but still get the PR from doing it. (and well, also evidenced by the fact that Google isn't doing any magic tricks by offering a symmetrical gigabit for 70 bucks. As current technology makes that price/performance ratio possible)
And now we get even more evidence of this by the fact that they are willing to send their customers to last decade speeds if they don't behave as if they were living in it.
Google's plans when making devices like their Nexus phones and tablets is to show manufacturers how to go about it to make competent devices (at least that was the idea when it all started)
Now they are attempting to do this with internet connectivity, by showing ISP's how to offer speeds that are worthy of this decade.
But what they don't seem to realize (or maybe they do but are hopeful?), is that ISP's have absolutely no interest in doing this in the first place. Since of course those ISP's also happen to be content distributors. on something that isn't nearly as competitive as the internet. |
|
 N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" GuanoPremium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1 | I can honestly say I've never violated copyright. I have no file trading software on my computer, and the only place I download music from is iTunes. With the exception of surfing the web, paying bills, the only thing I use my Internet for is streaming XM, and streaming Netflix to my Internet enabled TV.
Now, if something I have downloaded from iTunes or watched on Netflix was not properly cleared through copyright, I'm not the one who violated copyright, the provider did. I paid for what I thought was a properly obtained content. No Mens Rea exists, and being a reasonable person I had every reason to believe the multinational corporation I am paying for content properly vetted its offering.
--
Petty people are disproportionally corrupted by petty power |
|
Kamus
join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX | said by N3OGH:I can honestly say I've never violated copyright.
I believe you in thinking you've never done it. But if you've ever been on YouTube there's a HUGE chance you have. or watched something a friend posted on Facebook, etc. If you have ever listened to a friends mixed tape (or if you're not old enough for that, a mixed CD) or recorded anything from the radio at some point if in your life. You have, in effect, violated copyright.
So while unlike most people you might not be aware of it, it doesn't mean you haven't done it repeatedly. |
|
| Copyright holders can easily have material removed from youtube |
|
|
|
birdfeedrPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
kudos:8 | reply to Kamus
said by Kamus:said by birdfeedr:To save some of the effort and repetition,
Only copyright infringers will receive the notices.
So pretty much everyone? (though there are some people that actually believe they have never, ever infringed copyright) This is clearly directed to current Six Strikes efforts at this time. |
|
birdfeedrPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
kudos:8 | reply to Kamus
said by Kamus:said by N3OGH:I can honestly say I've never violated copyright.
I believe you in thinking you've never done it. But if you've ever been on YouTube there's a HUGE chance you have. or watched something a friend posted on Facebook, etc. If you have ever listened to a friends mixed tape (or if you're not old enough for that, a mixed CD) or recorded anything from the radio at some point if in your life. You have, in effect, violated copyright. Q: Why is the **AA staying away from Google?
A: ISP subscribers are easier pickings, especially since they've got the ISPs on board.
Good luck getting Google to cripple their service. |
|
N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" GuanoPremium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1 | reply to Kamus
It was my understanding under fair use that it was legal to tape a song from FM radio. Can't remember if I did it when I was a kid, that was a long time ago.
Never passed around mix tapes, just wasn't my thing.
I think both examples are a bit out of context. We are talking about violating copyright via the Internet. Two COMPLETELY different animals.
Taping a song off the radio produces a clearly inferior product the degrades in quality exponentially with every subsequent generation. Mix tapes degrade as well and you pretty much only trade them with a few people.
With the Internet, I can trade with anyone in the word instantaneously, with no loss of quality whatsoever.
Big difference...
--
Petty people are disproportionally corrupted by petty power |
|
Kamus
join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX | reply to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:Copyright holders can easily have material removed from youtube
Yes. |
|
Kamus
join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX | reply to N3OGH
said by N3OGH:With the Internet, I can trade with anyone in the word instantaneously, with no loss of quality whatsoever.
Big difference...
I know! It's so much better isn't it? ^_-
--EDIT-- You reminded me of this:
»www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvvKsOFEEqQ |
|
| reply to N3OGH
It's easy to play holier-than-thou, isn't it?
Two completely different animals?
So, are you saying that copyright infringement on the internet is a big no-no, but infringement in the real world is okay? You do realize that the average person unknowingly violates copyright infringement dozens of times per day. Some of it is excused by fair use (fair use only means that the infringement is not actionable, but it is still considered infringement), but most of it is not.
Ever sing a song, whistle or hum while walking down the street? Infringement!
Ever sing Happy Birthday at a party? Infringement!
Use a copier? Share a recipe? Snap a photo of someone next to a statue? Infringement! Infringement! Infringement!
It is incredibly hard to avoid infringing activities, but apparently it is incredibly easy to excuse your own as harmless while condemning everyone else as immoral. |
|
N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" GuanoPremium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1 | Oh please, spare me the self righteous bullshit. People singing happy birthday and and taking pictures in front of statues have no clue. Even if they did, it's a totally different animal and you clearly know it.
If I travel & take a picture in front of a statue with a friend, just how do I compensate the copyright holder? Where do I pay for participating in a happy birthday singalong?
If I install file sharing software on my computer in order to download popular music or a movie that's only in theaters then I clearly know what I'm doing.
Making every effort to consume content from what I believe to be authorized providers whom I am paying proper compensation isn't self righteous. It's being a law abiding citizen.
Go on being a thief (or an advocate for the same). If it makes you feel good to call me self righteous, so be it. It doesn't make what you are doing, or what you advocate right.....
--
Petty people are disproportionally corrupted by petty power |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| LOL I almost wet my pants with the Happy Birthday example. Yea buddy, thats the same as illegally downloading a movie while its still in theaters.
These thieves are so entertaining, I probably wouldnt come to this website if they didnt flock here. |
|
| reply to birdfeedr
• Everybody who uses torrents are pirating something. |
|
| reply to birdfeedr
said by birdfeedr:
.Everybody who uses torrents are pirating something.
Wrong. People get Linux distros etc. Just because you use torrents doesn't mean you pirate as well. |
|
| BlaBlaBla
OK, so 99% of the material downloaded via Torrents is Illegal. Get real man. Every time Ive seen someone using Torrents, its 20 copyrighted movies in queue. |
|
| I am not saying "everyone", I'm saying just b/c you use torrents doesn't mean you pirate. This whole comment section is BS. Sounds like some Time Warner employee in here. birdfeedr probably has a torrent client running now seeding all kinds of copyright material. Who really gives a shit. |
|
| reply to N3OGH
Please point out to me where I admitted to any thievery or infringement or advocated the same. You can't, because I didn't.
I, however, can easily point out your own statement:
I can honestly say I've never violated copyright.
- N3OGH
There's nothing honest about that. It is a bold claim that cannot possibly be true. I was merely pointing out that it is impossible to be entirely guilt-free when it comes to modern copyright law. And claiming to be guilt-free while preaching to everyone else is incredibly hypocritical.
As so many have pointed out, infringement is infringement -- no matter how big or small. Whether committed against the rich or poor, corporations or individuals, online or offline, intentionally or unintentionally. The law still considers it all infringement and therefore wrong. And fair use only counts once you have proven it in a court of law.
It's pretty clear that the one being self-righteous is you.
Have a nice day! |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
1 edit | quote:
I can honestly say I've never violated copyright.
- N3OGH
.... and being so damn intelligent, you should be able to conclude that he's referring to uploading/downloading music/movies/software on the internet. He even explains himself fully following that quote anyway.
But thanx for explaining how everyone breaks copyright every single day, in an attempt to justify people who maliciously infringe on copyrighted material via the 'net.
There is no justification, its against the law. The end. |
|
