We get the same shit. They are out of their thieving fucking minds. I am glad the guy got time. Too bad I can't order up a thousand ass rapes for him as well.

If a man can get shot 4 times in the arm, once in the face and once again through the top of his head over 4 cigars then why not?


.

How much time do you think he'll actually spend behind bars?

.

ain't that the truth?

.

He committed copyright infringement. It is a CIVIL MATTER and NOT a criminal matter. He should have been sued, not arrested. Dumbfucks supporting this are the same morons who smoke weed and then vote for politicians who think they're criminals and want to put them in jail. Fucking morons.

Copyright infringement has been criminal for a long time.
Stop listening to dumbfucks who don't know the law. :1orglaugh

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2319

Are you retarded, a pirate or both ?

(that's a rhetorical question btw)

this is it. it is not like 779k people wants to see the movie and if its not available for free they will pay for it ... some of you guys have to learn how warez and piracy from surfers point of view works anyway, thinking 779k will pay for the movie is just ill ... :2 cents:

Naw, they should get a bill or lose internet for 30 days. A little bite...but a bite.

Total garbage. I didn't read the rest of the thread past the first few replies to see if someone already said this but:

1. This did not COST the studio over $4 Million, it represents a potential loss of $4 Million, on the assumption that everyone of those ~800k people would have gone to the theatre and paid full price for the movie. Additionally, unless they polled all of those people, they have no clue how much they actually lost, so in calculating the damages they basically used made up math, like they have since the beginning of charging piraters with crimes.

2. It has been proven time and time again that people who download things often do so as a preview and then will purchase, rent, and or go see the media live [music, movies, or TV.]

3. This was the sixth movie in a franchise, can you blame them for wanting to make sure it didn't suck before going to see it? How many movies can't even get a sequel right, let alone a sixth instalment.

4. It was a Cam version, those are horrific generally and I bet most of those ~800k people didn't even make it halfway through, but if they liked what they saw, they probably shelled out the $$ to go see it in theatres to get the true experience.

5. Let every one of you who hasn't recorded shows off the TV onto VHS back in the day, made mix tapes off the radio back in the day, or downloaded a single thing illegally cast the first stone.

Piracy is not the same as theft. Potential loss is not the same as true cost. Piracy does not always equal lost revenue, often it's a preview. Taking away six years of a person's life for wanting to share content which he's not making a dime off of and you being joyful about it in a forum, is pretty pathetic when most of you break other laws, download yourself, or have pirated content in the past through other mediums before the internet.

Unlike most of the news posted here, this is relevant to the industry you stupid monkey

I can't believe there is still that a big an interest in these Fast and Furious flicks

Eat a dick and die in a fire.

:1orglaugh

I did not see anybody supporting it. Most of the people are just discussing the methodology of counting lost sales.

He was selling hard copies, was caught before and made quite and unrepentant facebook post after he was popped and released.

He got three years probably won't do all of it. I would expect you to respond so considering your parent company is Manwin correct?

He was out to make money, plain and simple.

If someone else makes a movie and puts it up for sale, on internet and hard copies and they do NOT LICENSE IT TO YOU and you turn around and sell it you do not have a say when you get caught and are prosecuted by the laws of the land...GET IT????

DIMFUCKING PRICK - No wonder your sites convert like shit.

Fuck off :321GFY

I feel the same way as you :)

I didn't know he was selling Dvd's of it. That I don't agree with and he should got to jail!

Selling tangible disks is stealing. Selling or sharing a digital copy of a "virtual item" is still a gray area.

There's no grey area, IP is IP no matter what the medium is.

Selling something that does not belong to you is a grey area?

That was pretty funny...........oh wait, you're serious :Oh crap

Yesssss!

xxxxxxxxxxxx

I didn't realize I was begging for money! Selling someone else's content is stealing and very wrong. Sharing content is a gray area. I'm also a musician and I share my content all the time. I guess I am thinking more like a musician then a porn industry person. There are tons of people that download movies and music to preview then if the movie is good they go to the movies and watch it. They don't really have porn movie theaters anymore so I can see where you would be a bit sensitive on this subject!

I am rarely serious but this a legitimate thought process of people that think piracy is acceptable.

It does belong to you because you downloaded it. :)

Would sharing dvd copies be more acceptable than selling them?

I'm not sure if I understand what intellectual property actually means. If my neighbor tells me his secret recipe for lets say pork chops. I copy his recipe and his wife likes my pork chops better. So much that she gets a divorce and marries me. Does my neighbor go to the police and tell them I stole his intellectual property and his wife?

You're obviously no rocket scientist.

IP in the form of copyright is a work created by someone which is then protected by copyright law regardless of the format in which it is published.

Software, Video, Books, Unique Ideas, Newspaper Articles are all examples of IP which can be communicated using several different mediums - they all enjoy the same protection no matter what the medium is.

You can't like own an idea, man. :)

What I've noticed is that people who make all these counter arguments eventually lose.

It's pretty simple : Rich people made something; now watch them protect it. The end.

It will always end in favor of big money because free downloads don't create jobs or taxes.

.

Oh, so there's a thought process behind piracy ?

This is getting funnier with every post :)

Yours or mine? :winkwink:

Of course people think about it before downloading something for the first time. They wonder if they'll get in trouble and conclude whether it is stealing or a gray area. All humans rationalize their decisions.

You can own the unique expression of an idea. That is copyrightable and often trademarked.

Does that mean I can't recreate the idea? Or that I can't share the original idea and give the creator credit?

Intellectual Property:

Intangible rights protecting the products of human intelligence and creation, such as copyrightable works, patented inventions, Trademarks, and trade secrets. Although largely governed by federal law, state law also governs some aspects of intellectual property.

Intellectual property describes a wide variety of property created by musicians, authors, artists, and inventors. The law of intellectual property typically encompasses the areas of Copyright, Patents, and trademark law. It is intended largely to encourage the development of art, science, and information by granting certain property rights to all artists, which include inventors in the arts and the sciences. These rights allow artists to protect themselves from infringement, or the unauthorized use and misuse of their creations. Trademarks and service marks protect distinguishing features (such as names or package designs) that are associated with particular products or services and that indicate commercial source.

Copyright laws have roots in eighteenth-century English Law. Comprehensive patent laws can be traced to seventeenth-century England, and they have been a part of U.S. law since the colonial period. The copyright and patent concepts were both included in the U.S. Constitution. Under Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, of the Constitution, "The Congress shall have Power ? To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." The first trademark laws were passed by Congress in the late nineteenth century, and they derive their constitutional authority from the Commerce Clause.

The bulk of intellectual Property Law is contained in federal statutes. Copyrights are protected by the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C.A. §§ 101 et seq. [1994]); patents are covered in the Patent Act (35 U.S.C.A. §§ 101 et seq. [1994]), and trademark protection is provided by the Lanham Act (also known as the Trademark Act) (15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1501 et seq. [1994]).

Here here!

Well said!

Obviously you have never created anything worth protecting.

It really isn't.

That's your created content, so it's your choice whether to share freely or not. Piracy of content infringes on the lawful exclusive rights of the rights holder to distribute their content in the manner that they see fit.