![]() |
definition of theft
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
what difference does it make what we call it ? you didn't pay for it you cant use it it is that simple? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
the US supreme court just recently ruled that timeshifting was legal in a cloud that cloud included the segments of the internet that company has hundreds of thousands of customers of that RPVR service and the company that provide that service turns a profit on that offering so you are wrong on all three counts, what you just said is exactly the problem i am talking about, reclassifying it as theft to try and squash fair use on the new technology. if you define it as fraud you don't have that problem because you realize that every person who subscribes to that RPVR service has a right to those shows, (because they bought the cable , and have the right to timeshift it) which totally removes the deception since they actually have the right. |
<br>
Awesome tag! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
like using a torrent like a vcr, i do pay for the shows (when i pay my cable bill) when i use the torrents to timeshift tv shows i am using just like my parents used a vcr. it just a better vcr, because it has infinite hard drive space (swarm) never misses a show, never fails to tape. no tv producer loses any income from this act because if i didn't use the torrents i would have PVRd the show anyway, and they would have gotten paid for those commercial spots anyway. Quote:
my only problem is that when you try and reclassify piracy as theft you take away rights from people rights established by the courts rights to use the new technology in a legitimate (fair use way) you hinder growth (like cheap solid state disk -- because of format shifting) or like the previous response Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
they are exact opposites, 1 removes the original the second does not there is no way possible for it to cover both extremes. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
the parallel for all former members of milfhunter to the cable company is quite clear every former member who is using that swarm is quite simply timeshifting the original seeders actions are also covered by fair use all be it a different fair use when i seed my favorite episode of dr who (i want to keep the analogy consistent) i do do with the intent of getting it back for later viewing i am using swarm as a backup the only people who are commiting piracy are those who are taking the content without paying their actions are a deceptive claim that they have bought a right to view (see fraud) go after the seeder and you are taking away a persons right to use the technology in a legitimate fair use way (backup) That the problem with classifying it as theft, you take away those rights, classify it as fraud and you don't make that mistake and you only go after the people who are actually comitting the crime. |
Quote:
|
Can you pick the guy that's into time-shifting?
http://i768.photobucket.com/albums/x...ePackage-1.jpg . |
Fact: I will steal from you and you will not do shit...
Fact: Steal from me and i will fucking kill you... |
Quote:
Facts are that we become a police state to protect author rights. (DCMA etc) Facts are that reinstalling software is a pain because we need to remember where we left all these huge numbers to type in. So a new model would be great. Like in Germany, where there is a fee for virgin CDs that pays for copyright. Of course, a fee on internet traffic will not do, so i wonder what can be done ......... But the entire model of enforcing copyright sucks. It really is disturbing. Now how to produce porn if everyone can copy it freely? that sure is a problem. Lots of people would still produce music eve if it were distributed freely. Lots of books would have much more impact if they were freely distibutable. Maybe we should have a spy program on our computer that pays very SMALL fees for all we watch. Or at the end of each movie you decide how many micro-cents you thing you should pay for it. Most stuff could be much cheaper and easier to use, if it were not carefully guarded by copyright and stuff Guess some people better informed then me already thought about this and found some solution, but guess there is no good solution yet. |
|
Quote:
is this similar to shape shifting? |
Quote:
'Piracy' is a broad term. It can be copyright infringements (in that context), piracy in Somalia, piracy in the middle age... or whatever. Maybe you forgot what a real pirate is? |
Quote:
|
Broke ass losers will forever argue about their "right" to download the property of others. Property they can't afford otherwise.
. |
Guys! I have to apologize, I think I have to mislead the discussions by using the wrong phrasing of my questions. My point wasn't to start a big fight about fair usage policy or syntactical meanings of theft. Let rephrase my self :
This was the real question : Why is it so hard to convince people that piracy is a criminal offence and is morally wrong! thats all really |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
If you want to "timeshift" then there's a thing called a DVR, there's also DVD burners. If you want to go old school there's VCR. You can buy the DVD set from wally world. Or you can legally purcahse a digital copy from Itunes, Amazon, XBL or PSN. But of course $2 is to much for cheap ass bums that live in mommy's basement. Also many shows are available for legal streaming on sites like Hulu. Plenty of ways to LEGALLY "time shift" without the use for torrents |
Quote:
you really are stupid for not fixing the picture in your insult. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
dvr have a fixed size hard drive torrents do not dvr fail if the power goes out torrents just recheck and continue along dvr can only timeshift a limited number of shows that air at the same time torrents don't care and so on if i have paid my cable bill i have already paid for that content, so your get stuff for free bullshit it totally and utterly wrong this is about forcing me to use an inferior technology so that the $2 itunes seems like a good deal instead. Quote:
as for buying it from itunes, it not the cost it the fact i have already paid for that content, and i have a right to timeshift it for free. i don't like paying twice for the same right. now if you don't care great send me a check for all your hosting bills if you don't want to pay twice for something you already paid for why the fuck would you think it is unreasonable for me to have the exact same feeling. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
the sanctioned form of pirating (privateers) came after that. if you understood the history of pirates, then you can see how the name the pirate bay is an appropriate term to discribe torrents as a fair use distribution (see salvage). |
Quote:
. |
Quote:
Also when you "time shift" it's not supposed to be FOREVER. If you watched a "time shifted" episode and you don't have enough room DELETE IT. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Just so we are clear if you pay a monthly cable bill that entitles your to a free copy of every TV show because it's unfair for you to pay twice. So logically if someone is paying for a monthly subscription to a porn site he should be allowed to have a perrmanent copy of all the content on that site beause he's already paid for it. |
Quote:
No one posts that kind of common sense on this topic without the eyepatch-wearing parrot-on-the-shoulder-having gideon pie-rat hitting you with wall after wall of rationalization as to why it's okay to take the work of others and profit from it with no compensation to the copyright holder. No one. |
Quote:
|
I'm in the middle of a heated discussion about this on another forum -- this argument is regarding movies, music and software.
It seems like the attitude of the debater is directly related to their age. Those with no mortgage payments, family and other responsibilities seem to think they are entitled to everything for free, and will rationalize some of the dumbest points to make themselves feel better about theft. So, I think its mostly younger folks who know that its wrong, but they will never admit it, and almost convince themselves that its OK. |
/shake head
distribution of someone elses full works for monetary gain is not fair use. Not now - not ever. /leave |
Quote:
Just so its clear, I'm not pro theft however its disturbing the common sense some of our fellow gfyers are showing. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
you are talking about taking away rights that the old technology gave you. How stupid do you have to be to think that is legitimate. Quote:
:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh if it was only allowed to be watched at that time, then moving it to another time would have been equally illegal. The content producers in that case claimed that they licienced the content for "viewing on that specific day at that specific time" when they tried to argue that moving it to another day was a copyright infrignement. The supreme court ruled against them. Quote:
you believe it unfair for me to ask you to pay twice for the same service but you have no problem demanding that i do. Quote:
if you grant them full access to everything you have ever produced the copyright act (thru the fair use section) grants them the right to back it up and time shifting etc. You need to keep the content fresh so they have a justification to keep comming back. |
Quote:
look history the first pirates were just committing salvage of delelict vessels it wasn't until the first pirate argued that "God" took the goods away from the owner (with the storm that sunk the ship) and "God" granted him the ownership by providing the winds that allowed him to find the sunken ship. That there was a legal right to be a "pirate" when that happened thieves (who sunk the ship and killed all the witnesses) were just pretending to be pirates so that they could likewise claim that "God" granted them ownership. Obviously because it was easier to just sink a ship and then "find" the booty rather then legitimately scour the seas for legitimately sunken ships, those "thieves" usurped the term. But that does not change the fact that the term pirate was NOT EQUAL to thieves. If the pirate bay wants to use the term in the context of defending fair use in the same way as the original pirates used it to defend the fair dealing of "Salvage" then that is their right only an idiot would argue that justifies calling them thieves simply because in the past thieves usurped the term from the real pirates. |
So....
If I pay for a month of hosting but don't use it can I timeshift my use to later? If I pay for a month of cell phone access but don't use it can I timeshift the usage to a later time? If I pay for a concert ticket but don't use it can I timeshift my listening/viewing rights to a later show? If I buy a movie theatre ticket but don't go can I timeshift my viewing rights to a later theatre showing? If I rent a car for a month but don't pick it up do I get to have a free 'timeshifted' car for a month of my choosing next year? ... etc etc etc NO posting content in a publically accessable place is not timeshifting - its theft/fraud for profit. publically posting complete unaltered works owned by someone else is not 'salvage / timeshifting / fair use' - not now - not ever. It is in no way condoned by any fair use provisions. All legal provisions allow for PRIVATE use/backup/storage/timeshifting. In no way does it allow for PUBLIC access/sharing. Clouds/torrents/fileshare technologies are not private. and thats pretty much where giddyboy fails - PUBLIC vs. PRIVATE. and he/she/it will fail on that point forever . |
Quote:
It was a criminal sanction of the fraud of pretending you were doing a legitimate salvage it was necessary because when "pirates" got caught it was because the ship had guards with enough skill to stop the murder and the theft. |
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:14 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc