Members m_Calavera Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 Off topic i know, but: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7240234.stm Possibly the most laughable thing i have read today. so far. Im so against this it's not even funny. BB anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mattapooh Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 Isn't file sharing much crazier in Europe than in North America? I mean, probably moreso in Canada due to us having a better network system, but still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cdawzrd Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 {censored}. That. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members IvIark Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 They'll be very hard pressed indeed to get that passed the Euro law makers. It's a total infringement on privacy and data protection. So another time and money wasting white paper by the government then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members m_Calavera Posted February 12, 2008 Author Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 Exactly. Actually it wouldn't suprise me if they manage to pass it. It's so retarded it just might convince our politicians i think on the data protection side it would be legal, your details can be passed to 3rd parties under certain circumstances. Criminal proceedings etc. Ok i'm off to burn down the civic offices near me. Bai! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members melx Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 how would they know what's illegal and legal files? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members IvIark Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 The quote on the BBC is the best comparison, it's like the post office opening all your mail, which is of course illegal. They'll never pass it. The first person to take it to the European court for an infringement of human rights will wipe the floor with them and leave them looking stupid (again) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members chump5150 Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 Bank robbers meet in a pub to plan a robbery, then they rent a car from Hertz to do the job.When the robbers get caught, this will happen:Prosecutors charge the robbers first, then they charge Hertz because the robbers used Hertz property to commit the crime, then they charge the neighborhood pub because the crime was planned there. Then they charge Glock for manufacturing the guns used in the robbery, then Nike and Ray-Ban for making the shoes and shades the robbers wore. And on and on and on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members HKSblade1 Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 stop pirating ?the ones that get caught and have to pay up act all innocent they know they f'd up! loser lottery can happen on any given daySony, BMG, Warner have started active servers among file sharing sites, torrents and so on. Discussions as much as virus' to enhance "lesson teaching" worms that once download is received, a little reminder pops up adding you to a watch list. Many ideas and they are "within their rights" to do this.Steinberg added fixed hardware locks ( sure they're hackable) to secure their software, others to add measures in the near future. It's not up to Govt to reduce piracy, the Media and SW co's have to make the changes, enforce their efforts in lawsuits against perps. Some have already started. Instances of Sonar 7 torrent sites have been warned and users with phony keys being stupid enough to register have been busted. Aims at thwarting piracy are going as far as costs in advertisments. Their money spent will come back from the perps they catch !One of the recording seminars for dealers have stressed anti-piracy and new legal measures against those who are caught.Govt can't stop it, but Media creators investments are being added to dvd, software and music in efforts to catch thieves.Blaming the govt or big co's for protecting their mediums from theft is one thing, piracy and file sharing was never legal. Millions just think it is. Some of those millions will soon be made examples of in terms of fines, penalties and "trackers" created by the sw companies to catch the perps!most companies offer trials, preview clips, so the argument of "i just wanted to see it or hear it, then decide to buy", does not fly in the courts. That excuse cost someone 33 grand in damages!If you are innocent, you have nothing to worry about :poke: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members m_Calavera Posted February 12, 2008 Author Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 I completley agree. I never download any music from the internet, yet alone illegal music. As you said, it's not up to the government to sort this, and that is where my main beef lies. Aside from that, it's not even a decent, workable solution. I think it would be great to have a system similar to the BBC Iplayer, whereby you could download music for free, and keep it for a limited period of time. It would be much easier to develop something along those lines than police the entire interwebs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members IvIark Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 If you are innocent, you have nothing to worry about :poke: That's the standard response you get when someone is trying to take away some of your privacies or freedoms and you dare question it. Just for the record, I am not a pirate and am more than happy to support artists by buying both music and film. I am still however strongly opposed to any move which takes away privacy and freedoms which I am currently entitled to under law. I have no worries about being prosecuted, but I do not want the country I live to turn into something out of 1984. In the US it's a federal crime to tamper with the mail, and I suspect there would be quite a few Americans that would be a bit pissed off if your government turned round and said, oh by the way, we're revoking that law and we're going to check your mail just so we can check you're not breaking any laws. Exactly the same principle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TheGareth Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 Looks like they're getting the ISPs to take action because it's such a long drawn out process for the record companies or the government themselves to get IP addresses then to get injunctions and all that jazz. I don't think that ISPs will agree to this at all....but you never know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members doug osborne Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 ...As you said, it's not up to the government to sort this, and that is where my main beef lies.... You're both very wrong. In the US, Copyright is one of the few Rights our founding fathers put in the Constitution. Their intent was to encourage the creative arts, and to prevent monopolies. Copyright Infringement is a federal crime. The reason why the federal government has not charged any song file traderwith infringement is that the actual value of each infringement is defined in the constitution as the statutory rate of 9.1 cents. The DMCA raised that fine, but any enforcement would be struck down in a heartbeat by a Strict Constructionist court. Burden of Proof is different in Civil court than in Criminal court, and the RIAA and MPAA have taken it upon themselves to take civil action against people who put a substantial amount of assumed copyright-protected material in their upload file (no one has been sued or charged with a crime for downloading, and file trading is not piracy, a different matter because no change in ownership or money happens). The industries know, through BigChampagne.com, what files are being traded, and they know that the most-traded files are also the biggest-selling. Filtering infringing content with anti-virus or other software can be done if it is voluntary. Anything beyond that strongly violates 4th Amendment Rights to privacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members m_Calavera Posted February 12, 2008 Author Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 A)I live in the UK B)The article is from the UK, regarding UK Law and imminent legislation :poke: k thnx bai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members doug osborne Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 A)I live in the UKB)The article is from the UK, regarding UK Law and imminent legislation:poke:k thnx bai I understand, and that's why I leaned on the US aspects in my answer. But, it's not called the World Wide Web for nothing. This is a global problem, and will have to be treated with a global solution, and US interests are strong and probably will lead the way (up or down, who knows). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members m_Calavera Posted February 12, 2008 Author Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 "This is a global problem"Couldn't agree more, which is why I have a problem with the UK Government wasting their time even thinking about that POS idea. If they bring that law in i'll start downloading music as quick you can say "Limewire". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.