Members techristian Posted June 12, 2008 Members Share Posted June 12, 2008 Check it out. http://www.reportonbusiness.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080611.wcopyright0611/BNStory/Business/?cid=al_gam_nletter_dtechal Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members techristian Posted June 13, 2008 Author Members Share Posted June 13, 2008 I thought that $500 for individuals was a bit steep. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members techristian Posted June 15, 2008 Author Members Share Posted June 15, 2008 This is even worse....up to $20,000 fine for using peer-to-peer services. http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/news/story.html?id=66745687-c8c6-40dd-aa08-233d721e05c8 Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted June 15, 2008 Members Share Posted June 15, 2008 "Other everyday acts, such as recording a TV show or taking music from a compact disc and putting it on an MP3 player are illegal but are never enforced, Mr. Geist said." Not in the US: What about Disney Vs. Betamax? And I think any court would decide that copying a CD you bought to an MP3 player would fall under fair use. In fact, companies are very quick to point out that when you buy intellectual property, you don't buy the media, but rights to use the material. You paid for the right to listen to the music, not for the plastic medium, which is merely a delivery system. Just as you could carry a portable CD player to play that music, you could carry a portable MP3 player to play that music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sventvkg Posted June 15, 2008 Members Share Posted June 15, 2008 Canada where they now Taze you as punishment for not having a Metro ticket in Vancouver. Pain compliance? Canada is a frontline of the NWO. These copyright laws are totalitarian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members StratGuy22 Posted June 15, 2008 Members Share Posted June 15, 2008 We don't {censored} around. I hear it's going to be like marijuana. They aren't going after the little guys, they are looking for the big file servers. So that's mainly college kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoboChrist Posted June 15, 2008 Members Share Posted June 15, 2008 "Other everyday acts, such as recording a TV show or taking music from a compact disc and putting it on an MP3 player are illegal but are never enforced, Mr. Geist said."Not in the US: What about Disney Vs. Betamax? And I think any court would decide that copying a CD you bought to an MP3 player would fall under fair use. In fact, companies are very quick to point out that when you buy intellectual property, you don't buy the media, but rights to use the material. You paid for the right to listen to the music, not for the plastic medium, which is merely a delivery system. Just as you could carry a portable CD player to play that music, you could carry a portable MP3 player to play that music. According to what's proposed, yes, buying a commercial product and making (ripping, not burning) an mp3 for private use is fine, as long as you are not required to get past any "locked" protection that media might have. We should have had this kind of thing 20 years ago, now we have a whole generation of people think they're entitled by this technology to take someone's property without paying for it, so I'm mostly in agreement with it. I personally know several people who play music for real money who will benefit from this.. it will be good for pro musicians and even live music in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members techristian Posted June 16, 2008 Author Members Share Posted June 16, 2008 According to what's proposed, yes, buying a commercial product and making (ripping, not burning) an mp3 for private use is fine, as long as you are not required to get past any "locked" protection that media might have.We should have had this kind of thing 20 years ago, now we have a whole generation of people think they're entitled by this technology to take someone's property without paying for it, so I'm mostly in agreement with it. I personally know several people who play music for real money who will benefit from this.. it will be good for pro musicians and even live music in general. But did you read the article further? Even ARCHIVING TV SHOWS will be a CRIME !! I'm all in favor of copyright, but this is getting INSANE. I must say something about the source of the second article though. The Windsor Star is my local newspaper and my mother thinks that they speak the Gospel Truth. However they tend toward exaggeration to sell papers and have printed many embellishments in the past. So the bit about archived TV shows may have been a creation of the editors. I would be found guilty for that with 100's of VHS tapes of my old shows dating back to 1978. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members slight-return Posted June 16, 2008 Members Share Posted June 16, 2008 But did you read the article further? Even ARCHIVING TV SHOWS will be a CRIME !! I read the initial article, but missed that - they mentioned illegal and a fine, but I didn't see where it was a criminal (as opposed to civil) fine Interesting note : archiving TV shows could constitute infringement in US law too, what people tend miss with Sony v Universal is that the time shifting fair use as per that ruling does not allow for archiving, but rather a single viewing at a different time (one thing to keep in mind when we interpret Sony v Universal is that it was a contributory infringement case, so what they needed to show was that there was signifigant legit use for their product not that every use is legit. In USA, "fair use" defenses are affirmative defenses so we want to be extra-careful with the scope of th Sony V Universal decision) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.