Copyright Laws

[CptSternn]

Found an interesting article today on copyright laws. Under new legislation being put through congress right now in america, you will get more time, mandatory, for copying a DVD than you would if you kill someone. Anyone else think this whole hollywood vs. the people thing is going to far? And that the lobbyists here have a bit too much power?

How can one argue that taking a life is LESS important or less criminal under the law than say making a copy of 'Doctor Doolittle 2'?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/21/p2p_is_murder/

Slán

[Granny-like_the_apple]

Ok, I don't really post anymore, but I woke up early today and when I saw this I decided to just prevent any stupid debate/fights right now. This is what the text of the bill says:

(a) Offense- Any person who, without the authorization of the copyright owner, knowingly uses or attempts to use an audiovisual recording device to transmit or make a copy of a motion picture or other audiovisual work protected under title 17, or any part thereof, from a performance of such work in a motion picture exhibition facility, shall--

(1) be imprisoned for not more than 3 years, fined under this title, or both; or

(2) if the offense is a second or subsequent offense, be imprisoned for no more than 6 years, fined under this title, or both.

[cussedness]

Leave it to Stone to play the proper Devil's Advocate. I, too, feel that the fair use clause is getting trammeled by the powers that be to a greater and greater degree.

I'm a supporter of the Gutenberg project and can see that over zealous protectionism can result in many works being lost completely because they fall under the same protectionism that is being shoved around. The problem is one of how much we can preserve without crossing the line. The copyrights act that added fifty years beyond the life of the author means that by the time it will be legal for a third party to preserve the works in the public domain, many authors will have been forgotten, their books turned to dust, and lost is other fashions. It reminds me of the burning of the library at Alexandria.

[Granny-like_the_apple]

Hey thanks T. No majors, no journalism, I'm gonna be a bum. If I weren't high right now I might respond to something you said but... yeah. Oops.

[AlKilyu]

Originally Posted by Granny-like_the_apple

Ok, I don't really post anymore, but I woke up early today and when I saw this I decided to just prevent any stupid debate/fights right now. This is what the text of the bill says:

(a) Offense- Any person who, without the authorization of the copyright owner, knowingly uses or attempts to use an audiovisual recording device to transmit or make a copy of a motion picture or other audiovisual work protected under title 17, or any part thereof, from a performance of such work in a motion picture exhibition facility, shall--

(1) be imprisoned for not more than 3 years, fined under this title, or both; or

(2) if the offense is a second or subsequent offense, be imprisoned for no more than 6 years, fined under this title, or both.

[CptSternn]

I didn't write the artclce guys, just lifed the link and posted it, so don't blame me for things The Register wrote.

Also, ally, isn't it odd you blast my post, but yet post a cartoon expressing the same views I posted on the same topic?

Eitherway, doesn't bother me as like most of europe, we laugh at the RIAA and when they come to ask ISP's for info on users, they tell em to feck off.

Slán

[Granny-like_the_apple]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

I didn't write the artclce guys, just lifed the link and posted it, so don't blame me for things The Register wrote.

Right, because you're in no way responsible for an article that you try to use as further proof of the US's idiocy. Bullshit. It took me all of five minutes to go to the act, which they link to in the article, and see that both the article was being misleading and you were lying/wrong. ("you will get more time, mandatory, for copying a DVD than you would if you kill someone." Tell me where it says that in the article.) It obviously struck you as crap, too, but you were so blinded by your disgust for America that you couldn't even put in the modicum of effort required to verify that what you were parroting was actually true. If it makes America seem bad, it must be true, right?

[Empty_Purple_Stars]

Originally Posted by Granny-like_the_apple

Right, because you're in no way responsible for an article that you try to use as further proof of the US's idiocy. Bullshit. It took me all of five minutes to go to the act, which they link to in the article, and see that both the article was being misleading and you were lying/wrong. ("you will get more time, mandatory, for copying a DVD than you would if you kill someone." Tell me where it says that in the article.) It obviously struck you as crap, too, but you were so blinded by your disgust for America that you couldn't even put in the modicum of effort required to verify that what you were parroting was actually true. If it makes America seem bad, it must be true, right?

WE MISS YOU!!!!!

[WolfMoon]

You forgot to write PWNED on that.


:lol:

[Granny-like_the_apple]

Thanks EPS... I'll be back sometime, I just need to stop being such a whore first. A metaphorical whore, that is.

[edible_eye]

hey, granny - could you at least leave those wonderful breasts here while you're away? i need something to lie on while i'm watching t.v.

[CptSternn]

So am I to gather everyone here is behind the RIAA's new law to put people in prison for sharing music files? Everyone here thinks thats a good idea and that people who share music, movies, and pictures shoudl go to prison?

Granny - your obviously not reading it correctly thien. Manslaughter (2) carries 2 - 6 years. Those years can be put aside, in leiu of a fine, or taken under consideration and held for a few years, if no further violations occur, then dismissed. Mandatory sentencing means a person has to do the time associated. Under that act, a person convicted of copying a couple of DVDs would get 6 years mandatory, more than manslaughter. Also note in most states, life in prison is 8 years (8 years is when you can file for your first parole in most states). What part are you missing?

If you read the thing, it also states taking parts of the work, which would mean taking things like say images from movies, even a secene which you use as an avatar or throw some text on it and put it in a thread, could get you prison time.

And this is ok? Ironic seeings how inthis thread alone I can spot a dozen things that would under that legislation get you prison time.

I don't care either way. I have servers in 3 countries, 2 of which are not the states, so I have about as much to worry about that law as I do about being caned in indonesia for the same offense.

Just thought people there might find that absurd, seeing how the time associated with it comparatively stacks against other crimes.

Cocaine distritution is 5 years, armed robbery 1st offense is 5, just browse the web and compare.

Slán

[Empty_Purple_Stars]

I don't recall seeing a post in this thread that says those facist fuckers at the RIAA are right.

This is ALL Lar's fault..

If he had just stuck to trying to figure out what went HORRIBLY wrong with Metallica, instead of recording *sob* WHISKEY IN THE JAR, then we would all be happily sharing and caring without fear of reprisal!

:x

Yes, it is totally fucking retarded what they are trying to do.

Without a doubt.

I ran a VCD/Warez channel on #EFNET for several years in the late nineties.

Hell, we had Phantom Menace SIX MONTHS before it was released in the theaters.

HA!!

Boy, was Lucas PISSED!!

*Hee*

The FBI joined our channel many, many times back in the day, and they told me on more than one occasion all they were concerned with was making sure no one was serving Child Porn in the channel.

I think that we have much more important things to be directing our time, money and attention on these days, but whats new.

I cover my ass in regards to file-sharing, as should anyone these days that chooses to do so.

It is fucking lame, but so is Metallica doing Whiskey in the Jar.

I blame it all on Lars, and still relish the moment when that friggin tool got booed offstage for his part in this whole lame debacle.

Only Lars would blame their shitty fucking record sales on file-sharing.

File share this, Lars you Prick!!

[Granny-like_the_apple]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

Granny - your obviously not reading it correctly thien.

What, the article or the bill? Because I got my information from the bill, NOT an article that you tried to distance yourself from after you realized it was misleading.

Manslaughter (2) carries 2 - 6 years. Those years can be put aside, in leiu of a fine, or taken under consideration and held for a few years, if no further violations occur, then dismissed. Mandatory sentencing means a person has to do the time associated. Under that act, a person convicted of copying a couple of DVDs would get 6 years mandatory, more than manslaughter. Also note in most states, life in prison is 8 years (8 years is when you can file for your first parole in most states). What part are you missing?

I hope you're doing this just to aggravate me, because believing that is the only thing that keeps me from actually getting aggravated. I'll do this one more time. The bill says:

(a) Offense- Any person who, without the authorization of the copyright owner, knowingly uses or attempts to use an audiovisual recording device to transmit or make a copy of a motion picture or other audiovisual work protected under title 17, or any part thereof, from a performance of such work in a motion picture exhibition facility, shall--

(1) be imprisoned for not more than 3 years, fined under this title, or both; or

(2) if the offense is a second or subsequent offense, be imprisoned for no more than 6 years, fined under this title, or both.

That's not mandatory, it's maximum. I'm sure you know the difference.

Oh, and what you're saying about copying a few DVD's for personal use and then getting thrown in jail? Totally not what the bill is about. From the bill summary:

Amends the Federal criminal code to prohibit the unauthorized, knowing use or attempted use of a video camera or similar device to transmit or make a copy of a motion picture or other copyrighted audiovisual work from a performance of such work in a movie theater.

(Sec. 103) Establishes criminal penalties for willful copyright infringement by the distribution of a computer program, musical work, motion picture or other audiovisual work, or sound recording being prepared for commercial distribution by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if the person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution.

And there's an explicit exemption for personal use:

Title II: Exemption from Infringement for Skipping Audio and Video Content In Motion Pictures - Family Movie Act of 2005 - (Sec. 202) Creates an exemption from copyright infringement for: (1) the making imperceptible, by or at the direction of a private household, of limited portions of audio or video content of a motion picture during a performance in or transmitted to that household for private home viewing from an authorized copy of the motion picture; or (2) the creation or provision of technology that enables such editing, is designed and marketed for such use, creates no fixed copy of the altered version, and makes no changes, deletions or additions to commercial advertisements or promotional announcements that would otherwise be performed or displayed.

If you read the thing, it also states taking parts of the work, which would mean taking things like say images from movies, even a secene which you use as an avatar or throw some text on it and put it in a thread, could get you prison time.

And this is ok? Ironic seeings how inthis thread alone I can spot a dozen things that would under that legislation get you prison time.

Oh yeah? You finally read the legislation instead of going solely off of that article? Pray tell, what parts say that? And for what would people here be going to prison?

[edible_eye]

hey - forget about all this political bullshit. where's the answer to MY question?

[Granny-like_the_apple]

Originally Posted by edible_eye

hey - forget about all this political bullshit. where's the answer to MY question?

No.

[AlKilyu]

There.

Now she's off the hook.

[Solumina]

:shock: wow those are um interesting…

[edible_eye]

Originally Posted by Granny-like_the_apple

No.

that's more like it.

[edible_eye]

and al -

those will work just fine. thanx.

[CptSternn]

Tstone - you forget about the kids the RIAA arrested and sued just a few months back? The 14 year old girl who downloaded a just a couple of songs had her own commerical during the superbowl.

Anyone else remember that?

Like I said though, tis not my neck. Stick your collective heads in the sand and yell everything is ok. Seems to work fer ye so far.

Slán

[Granny-like_the_apple]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

Tstone - you forget about the kids the RIAA arrested and sued just a few months back? The 14 year old girl who downloaded a just a couple of songs had her own commerical during the superbowl.

Anyone else remember that?

Like I said though, tis not my neck. Stick your collective heads in the sand and yell everything is ok. Seems to work fer ye so far.

Slán

I HEART SAND LIKE WHOA AND NOTHING YOU SAY CAN CHANGE THAT, POO ON YOU STINKY BUNS!

[Morbideus]

:shock: DAMN!! That was a big set of jugs....

[Asurai]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

Everyone here thinks thats a good idea and that people who share music, movies, and pictures shoudl go to prison?

One has no right to "share" the property, the intellectual creation, of another. It's not difficult to understand. That line of yours was only slightly better than a child's saying, "I didn't steal it; I borrowed it!"

Actually, scratch that. You're an adult, so that just makes your statement even worse.

Tstone - you forget about the kids the RIAA arrested and sued just a few months back? The 14 year old girl who downloaded a just a couple of songs had her own commerical during the superbowl.

I wasn't aware that 14-year-olds got an automatic pardon for any and all crimes commited. If something is a crime for adults -- and distributing/taking that to which they have no right or claim is certainly a crime ;-- then it is necessarily also a crime for adolescents. What's wrong for one group is necessarily wrong for all others.

That being said, the RIAA could have been a bit less, well, asshole-like about enforcing their rights.

[Solumina]

Originally Posted by Asurai

If something is a crime for adults -- and distributing/taking that to which they have no right or claim is certainly a crime ;-- then it is necessarily also a crime for adolescents. What's wrong for one group is necessarily wrong for all others.

I wouldn’t say necessarily, there are some things that are crimes for adults that aren’t crimes for adolescents and vice versa, but yes things that are illegal for adults to do are nearly always illegal for adolescents as well