Quote:
Originally Posted by Nautilus
Yes that is correct - the court ruling says a copy should be "created by user"; which I interpreted as "uploaded to the swarm by user" for those case where a user does not have such a device as a RS-DVR available to act on his behalf automatically (I believed we were discussing one of such cases, and the only way I see how that user-created copy can make it to the swarm is to be uploaded there by the user - but that doesn't mean other methods do not exist).
But indeed the original definition was "created by user". And the second part was "can be access by this user only". So if your copy was created by you - > then somehow made it to the swarm at your command - > and is accessible by you only while it is in the swarm, that's fair use and is legal.
Which means that your ISP was right when they told you cannot download a copy of Lost from a torrent, since that copy was not created by you. And a peer you downloaded this copy from, had no right to share it, because he can only share his backup copies with himself - not you no other persons, depsite them maybe being in legal possesion of a copy of a copyrighted work and thus having the right to backup it. They should backup it themselves, and share with no one but themselves.
|
except your interpretation of "created by the user" has to be wrong because the ruling was in favor of cablevision.
the stream doesn't even touch the user until they request the timeshifted copy.
it not recorded and then upload it is simple flagged for issolation. That request is all that is necessary for it to be considered "created by the user"
the point is the what is being played
is it a public broadcast or a private copy
and we have already established that it is a private copy that is being played.
Your adding extra conditions that were already overruled, those were the arguements made and accepted at the lower court level. This ruling says those a bullshit and you are making them anyway.
i have highlighted the extra part you put in there without valid justification
the other two conditions are made by the act of downloading from the swarm
is the copy that i download from the stream made by me (yes)
is the copy (not non working pieces) accessed by only me. (yes).
remember that the file is transmitted thru the internet as packets so if you were to argue that access of pieces was enough to invalid the accessing by only me this ruling would also have been ruled against. So that is in fact a difference strong enough to still answer yes too.
Quote:
|
The law (as quoted above) says it does matter where it comes from - it should be a copy created by yourself, which can be accessed only by yourself. It does not matter however if this copy is stored at your PC/VCR or in the "cloud" at some remote storage, as long as you meet the first two criterias. That's fair use - you can choose where to store your legal backup copies, and I as a copyright holder only cheer for those opportunities for our customers. As long as they do not share those backup copies with anyone, they surely can store them wherever they like more.
|
and again for the copy in question both conditions are met. you can't add an extra condition (uploaded by user) to create a false infringement.
Quote:
That's not bogus argument as you're trying to put it, that's how the laws are written - if you're not happy with them, call your congressman.
You're trying to persuade the GFY community that laws are already written the way you want them to be - which is false, they're not. Laws do not allow downloads from publicly accessible storage devices including clouds - they only allow to download from privately accessed cloud storage devices, and only of those copies created by you personally.
"Legal copiers" are liable too, if they share their copies among each others.
|
total and utter bullshit, if the stream being public automatically created infringement then timeshifting would never have been granted
the tv signal was being broadcast thru the air.
IF you were not allowed to give your friends copies then vcr would have encoded locks that pervented tapes from playing in vcr that they were not recorded on.
The technology has existed to do that, and it has never been forced on the manufacturers
you are making up rules just like you are making up rules above.