Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Dane
Why do you repeat your irrelevant example to avoid my questions?
Running a torrent site with knowledge of criminal activity is NOT the same as producing legal content that are manipulated to something illegal by someone else without your knowledge.
If you know there is criminal activity going on at your torrent site - shouldn't you:
1. Make a statement on your website, that you do not tolerate it?
2. React upon knowledge of criminal activity?
3. Not ignore it, instead of just laugh about it and make money off it??
If you ignore 2 and 3, then 1 will have no logical, moral or legal value...
I expect you to answer straight, so let me answer your question too:
If you produce some legal content that are manipulated into some illegal, like "virtual" cp (like the situation in your earlier new link), then no, you can not be held responsible if it is without your knowledge. However, if you know then I think you are morally obligated to report it. Legally obligated? That depends on the law. In US you are legally obligated to report cp (also virtual?), and you could get punished you if you don't, but they can not punish you for "contributing", if that was not your purpose. Same apply for torrent websites.... You see, it is the purpose - in other words; how you act that defines right or wrong, and the laws and courts defines further the "level" and direction of your actions.
|
but your definition of "knowing" changes between yourself and torrent site. You expect them to confirm absolutely that the person has a right to content before they load up a torrent, yet you don't do a full criminal background check on every member of your paysite to make sure they are not convicted of being a pedo before you sell them a membership. Obviously a pedo would only have one purpose for buying porn of adults when he is turned on by kids, and that is to make virtual porn.
your refusal to do such a background check makes you as willfully blind as the torrent site owner.
Quote:
|
gideon, I do not think I'm pulling those percentages "out my ass". I read somewhere, that on a site like the pirate bay, it is estimated 95% illegal piracy. "Fair use" is nearly non-existant, and you know as well as me, that movie previews, pieces of music, trial software etc. is not what most people are sharing. Just go to their toplists, and you will see the proof. Your opinion on what is fair use or not, does not matter in those statistics...
|
so some writers oppinion (sorry estimate) that is 95% counts but mine doesn't
your right btw neither oppinion matters only the actual ruling on the point of laws. Court cases that ignore the point are not relevant either.
canadian supreme court ruled that fair use/fair dealing does have any restrictions about the legality of the source.
Canada has a ruling about music that is exactly on point regarding the legality of using peer to peer to download songs.
us court ruled that it was legal to timeshift using a swarm
European courts have recognized that 1 download != 1 lost sale.
and US precedents have not come out to oppose these ruling, they just haven't been decided.
so basically torrent providers have ruling in their favor (+1) and open issues that as of yet could be ruled in their favor and could not (0). How could you come to the conclusion that they "know" that their is an infringement when the courts haven't even determined if the action is fair use or not yet.
Quote:
|
Regarding porn, fair use also include giving credit by using a small and limited amount of content. If their intentions were fair use, then all webmasters - affiliate and site owners - would be all over the big torrent sites now. But you know, that is not going to happen, because it is considered "spam" from the pirate's side.
|
backup
recovery
timeshifting
parody (downfall type -- which is pretty substantial in it scope)
are all fair uses.
You claim that don't apply to torrents.
but produce one case where fair uses like backup/timeshifting have been brought up as a defence and the court as explictly ruled that those fair use rights can't be obtained from a swarm.
Quote:
Everyone have the right to change things through their given free speech, including the defintions of fair use, but they can not do it by acting criminal or endorse anarchy. Then they just become a parody of their own cause and arguments. Of course, there are always things that a minority will consider unfair. Hell, I would like to drive faster, because I bought a fast car and consider myself a good driver, but that opinion does not give me the legal right to do so. I might not like it, but at least I have the right to speak against the majority. Driving fast will not change that...
The laws in the democratic world are made by democratic selected lawmakers, and the supreme courts can decide if those laws are unfair or not. If you are unsatisfied with the court rule, you can still confront the judgement, like in the piratebay case, and in the end you avoid future similar "unfair" rules, by doing it politically through new laws.
The main problem, as I see it, is that technology is developing faster than the democratic policy process and that courts can handle. It would be in best interest for all, to establish right/wrong asap when new issues and conflicts arrive. Unfortunately that is not how things work, and I think the pirates are just happy about that, because they exploit it.... If every copyright holder had the chance, easily and fast, to make use of their rights, then every case would totally send the pirate bay owners to thousands of years in prison...
|
thank good the copyright holders didn't have the right to define fair use or we would have the vcr, mp3 back up. and the internet (cache servers).