dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
6
share rss forum feed


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:2

1 edit
reply to tired

Re: Discussion about log retention

said by tired:

I can't wait to see you justify suing people who sample out of the bulk bins at the grocery store (which really is theft) for thousands of dollars.

I'm not defending this bullshit. I'm just stating facts. We live in a society under the rule of law.

You don't like the law then get the law changed.........until then, you break the law and you pay the price.

said by UK_Dave:

But isn't that Daffy Duck in your avatar?

Could you post the express written consent you received from Warner Bros to use that avatar?

My use of this pic is LEGAL in Canada. I DL'd the image for MY PERSONAL USE ONLY. I do not disseminate, share or otherwise infringe upon the original authors publicly accessible content. I do not benefit, directly or indirectly, from my personal use of this material. I do not offer this content for any other use period.

I do, however, understand the point you were making.........
Expand your moderator at work

Rastan

join:2007-04-25
Canada
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·voip.ms
reply to elitefx

Re: Discussion about log retention

quote:
My use of this pic is LEGAL in Canada. I DL'd the image for MY PERSONAL USE ONLY. I do not disseminate, share or otherwise infringe upon the original authors publicly accessible content. I do not benefit, directly or indirectly, from my personal use of this material. I do not offer this content for any other use period.

By using the copyrighted avatar and posting on a public forum, you are making the avatar publicly available. I can right click and save the avatar and use it myself.

If someone downloads a copyrighted file on BitTorrent, doesn't benefit from it directly or indirectly and if it's only for personal use, should they be sued just because they are uploading bits of the file to other people? One bit out of thousands is less severe than making available an entire avatar.


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:2
said by Rastan:

By using the copyrighted avatar and posting on a public forum, you are making the avatar publicly available. I can right click and save the avatar and use it myself.

By owning a house on a street you are making your dwelling publicly available. By parking your car in your driveway you are making it publicly available. By pulling out your wallet in a store you are making it publicly available. Hell, by walking down the street then you are making yourself publicly available.

Does this give the PUBLIC the right to use YOU and YOUR PROPERTY at their discretion?

PERSONAL USE ONLY means just that PERSONAL USE ONLY.

buttaknife

join:2007-06-01
said by elitefx:

said by Rastan:

By using the copyrighted avatar and posting on a public forum, you are making the avatar publicly available. I can right click and save the avatar and use it myself.

By owning a house on a street you are making your dwelling publicly available. By parking your car in your driveway you are making it publicly available. By pulling out your wallet in a store you are making it publicly available. Hell, by walking down the street then you are making yourself publicly available.

Does this give the PUBLIC the right to use YOU and YOUR PROPERTY at their discretion?

So they give you a logical example/scenario in which you have foot in mouth so you resort to illogical analogies in return? Even so, someone who has a torrent up, even thought it's "there", does it give the public the right to use the file to download to their computer?

This conversation is going in so many circles.


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:2
said by buttaknife:

This conversation is going in so many circles.

Yes it is and I for one have had enough. The world won't be happy till they can rob, steal, maim and kill to their hearts content anyway.

But we'll sure as hell hear them whine and cry when it happens to them..............what goes around, comes around.

Catch ya on the flip side...........

Rastan

join:2007-04-25
Canada
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·voip.ms
reply to buttaknife
I was trying to illustrate how ridiculous copyright laws are. Copyright trolls are trying to stretch the laws as far as they can, by trying to extort money from people who may have only uploaded a few bits of data out a 1GB+ file.

Therefore, if in your mind, the following argument is valid:

quote:
You don't like the law then get the law changed.........until then, you break the law and you pay the price.

Then I say, in that case, using a copyrighted avatar in a public forum should also be considered copyright infringement since you are "making it available" to the public. But hey, if you don't like the law, get it changed. Until then, if you break the law then you pay the price.

edit: One more thing; copyright infringement is not stealing. When you download a file, the person you are downloading it from still has their file. When stealing takes place, someone loses the item that was stolen. If you're unable to differentiate between stealing and copyright infringement you shouldn't be debating this issue.

UK_Dave

join:2011-01-27
Powassan, ON
kudos:2
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to elitefx
I'm sorry Elite. I didn't mean things to escalate to the point you felt your original position wasn't worth continuing to voice.

My original point was to highlight:

1. How easily we can break rules without really considering it to be such.

2. To highlight how in so many cases, it is people BREAKING laws that lead to laws we take for granted today. I think Rosa Parks is the usual shout-on this subject.

In your case, the very quote you (accurately, and correctly) posted in reply to my "accusation", came about through breaking, and testing, of original copyright law. There would not be the exception you quote, were that never to have happened.

The law rarely gets written by any other means, democracy or otherwise.

We need multiple views on this, and if helps you - here's a quote I've just found in another users post that sums up my angle on this:

"It should be emphasized that none of those objecting to or intervening in the motion in 2004 were there in support of what is sometimes called “piracy” by the alleged downloaders and file sharers. The battle was all about privacy – and when it can or should be breached, mindful among other things of the severe consequences of ordinary citizens being dragged into complex and costly litigation, quite possibly by mistake based upon unreliable information."

Cheers,
Dave


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:2
reply to Rastan
said by Rastan:

Then I say, in that case, using a copyrighted avatar in a public forum should also be considered copyright infringement since you are "making it available" to the public.

I know what you're saying. Tell it to the Prime Minister. He wrote the law not me. Downloading isn't the issue. It's DISTRIBUTION. Personal use is an INTENT issue. If somebody downloads content that is publicly accessible and uses it for a purpose OTHER than personal use only then and only then is it ILLEGAL in Canada.

My Avatar is attached to my PERSONAL account for my PRIVATE use only. Any 3rd party use of my Avatar has not been sanctioned by me therefore it would be deemed outside the scope of my Intended Personal Use.

Downloading a copyrighted CD or DVD for personal use only is perfectly legal in Canada as long as you make no more than 1 copy for backup and distribute it, in whole or in part, to no one period. TORRENTS do not work that way. Your INTENT may be legal but IMHO the process to aquire that content, by it's very nature, contravenes Canadian law. It's splitting hairs but that's the way it is.

Good nite folks..............

UK_Dave

join:2011-01-27
Powassan, ON
kudos:2
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

1 edit
Downloading a copyrighted CD or DVD for personal use only is perfectly legal in Canada as long as you make no more than 1 copy for backup and distribute it, in whole or in part, to no one period. TORRENTS do not work that way. Your INTENT may be legal but the process to aquire that content, by it's very nature, contravenes Canadian law. It's splitting hairs but that's the way it is.
-------------------------

So are you saying you are perfectly happy with people downloading copyright material from, say, USENET? Even if the author of the work disagrees?

--------
"Good nite folks.............."
---------

At least it wasn't "Th Th Th Th Th That's all folks...."


A Lurker
that's Ms Lurker btw
Premium
join:2007-10-27
Wellington N
reply to elitefx
said by elitefx:

My Avatar is attached to my PERSONAL account for my PRIVATE use only. Any 3rd party use of my Avatar has not been sanctioned by me therefore it would be deemed outside the scope of my Intended Personal Use.

Good thoughts, but you redistribute it every time you make a post here. Might be different if you had downloaded it for a screen saver on your own machine. Although, I think Daffy Duck is trademarked, which may (or may not) have different rules. You might be required to get express consent to use it....


Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to elitefx
said by elitefx:

said by Rastan:

By using the copyrighted avatar and posting on a public forum, you are making the avatar publicly available. I can right click and save the avatar and use it myself.

By owning a house on a street you are making your dwelling publicly available. By parking your car in your driveway you are making it publicly available. By pulling out your wallet in a store you are making it publicly available. Hell, by walking down the street then you are making yourself publicly available.

Does this give the PUBLIC the right to use YOU and YOUR PROPERTY at their discretion?

PERSONAL USE ONLY means just that PERSONAL USE ONLY.

Not to add fuel, but it isn't personal use only. Same rules apply when blogging about something and using someones images or content in your blog. You can get sued for that. You ARE after all using an image without permission.

I'm a photographer in my spare time and if someone used one of my images for example without permission in a public forum for "personal use", i am within my right to submit a cease and disist. Trust me i know, i've had to do it a dozen or so times. Same goes for your avatar.

That said, same goes for me having "bell" in mine. It's a game of cat and mouse

said by A Lurker:

said by elitefx:

My Avatar is attached to my PERSONAL account for my PRIVATE use only. Any 3rd party use of my Avatar has not been sanctioned by me therefore it would be deemed outside the scope of my Intended Personal Use.

Good thoughts, but you redistribute it every time you make a post here. Might be different if you had downloaded it for a screen saver on your own machine. Although, I think Daffy Duck is trademarked, which may (or may not) have different rules. You might be required to get express consent to use it....

+1 This is exactly it. That my friend is personal use. Using the image for a screensaver. Using it publicly is no different then what these "pirates" do. They download for personal use not intending to redistribute at least most of them. Avatar may have been intended for personal use but it has been left to "seed" if you may

UK_Dave

join:2011-01-27
Powassan, ON
kudos:2
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
Morning all (yawn).....

So, my point about USENET.

I've never used it, don't know much about it other than WIKI'ing it.

Seems there is no element of uploading when you download from "it"?

Could someone who understands it better enlighten me?

Ta,
Dave

Jaxom

join:2012-03-10
East York, ON
said by UK_Dave:

Seems there is no element of uploading when you download from "it"?

None. You can upload if you choose to but that is a separate process that involves setting up the software first to do so.

My newsreader has never even been configured to upload since I have no interest in doing so.

UK_Dave

join:2011-01-27
Powassan, ON
kudos:2
Thanks for the info, Jax - was just wondering.

Jaxom

join:2012-03-10
East York, ON
said by UK_Dave:

Thanks for the info, Jax - was just wondering.

No problem. It all works a bit like a torrent. You download a .nzb file that gives the software all the info it needs to get the binary files.

There are search engines for finding content:
»www.nzbclub.com/

»www.binsearch.info/

As for the topic of logs: I am extremely concerned about our rights being whittled away by law enforcement in Canada. I would gladly give up some of my protection so that we can ensure we don't become a police state.

In my humble opinion 90 days is more than enough time.

If law enforcement wants longer logs then they should make the differentiation between serious criminal acts (violence, child porn) and civil law cases (copyright issues). Longer logs should only be kept and used for the serious cases.


A Lurker
that's Ms Lurker btw
Premium
join:2007-10-27
Wellington N
said by Jaxom:

No problem. It all works a bit like a torrent. You download a .nzb file that gives the software all the info it needs to get the binary files.

You can also use various readers and pull headers. I understand that some of the nzb sites have been under attack recently. As well, some copyright holders have been issuing takedowns which some servers process automatically.

Interesting point in that this has resulted in take downs of text messages (which may solely be targeted because of their titles).