Missing Heroes, Smallville, 24 and other fave programs?

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Well think about it...if u had a file on ur machine just sitting there doing nothing, u think to urself...someone might want this file. I wana be able to share in my knowledge with them what I like. So then u upload it. They then see the file and download it to their machine. If they get found out...who do u think they will point the finger to?

Remember Oink? lol...

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

The blame lies with both equally, which is why you can get hammered legally for both uploading and supplying copyrighted material (ie songs/music/etc), and for the act of downloading said material (remember the 12 year old who got sued for downloading music???)

 

Was that the same 12yr old who didnt know what they were actually doing?

 

Whether they were aware of what they were doing or not is not the point. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, never has been, and never will be.

Additionally, we were not discussing intent to break the law, we were discussing who had the finger pointed at them and, legally, as i pointed out, its both.

 

I do agree with u there...but imagine what it would be like if someone had files available to download and no one downloaded them? what message is that sending out?

Weird how we are talking about this...cos I was reading the BBC news site last night and saw an article about legally copying CDs onto your computer and MP3 player...lol...

 

Whilst the facts listed above are indeed true, ads and such are not the problem here
most people who love TV as much as noel does would likely purchase it, or purchase the DVDs

what drives the global TV download scene is the fact that, like a lot of other industries run by stupid old white men, they seem to think globalization and the benefits it brings applies to them only, and not to their customer base, well **** them
Why the hell do you think I will wait 6 - 9 months to watch something my in laws saw last night? not gonna ****ing happen.. you want to play that bullshit game I suggest you start cutting, printing, packaging, and everything else in the supply chain in your own country, and stop benefiting from cheap foreign labor/land/utilities, or you wont see me stop benefiting from watching the show when you release

it, its only NOW in 2008 that they start to take the internet distribution model more seriously, god knows what took them so long, music has been traded online since the BBS days, its obviously a model that worked, they only had to find a way of monetizing it, rather than try and chase down every one who does it as criminals (due to laws passed by pressure from their own lobbyists)

its typical, and we like the morons we are defend their archaic distribution model because we are 'good people' come on fergal you know better than that.. you can slag me for downloading TV all you want, but at the end of the day I own over $10000 worth of DVDs, most of that in TV series (season 1 - 10 SG1, 1 - 3 Atlantis, 1 - 5 Alias, 1 - 3 House, Friends Complete, Sex in the city Complete, Futurama complete, BSG 1 - 2 + Razor, 24 1 - 6, blah blah blah

moving back on topic, damn right they should be payed more, and they shouldn't have to strike for 3 months till those same stupid old white men start getting nervous and give in, they should of been offered it years ago.

 

I saw that article too. But the legislation under question covers personal copying of purchased media that you, personally, own! It doesnt cover ripping the media from the tv, and uploading it for the world to use. (Here, for anyone interested)

I agree, that if no-one downloaded the available files, it would show people that they shouldnt be doing it, and that is just reasserting my point. Supply and demand! If no-one wanted to download it, no-one would upload it. That does not, however, absolve the uploaders of the responsibility, nor that of the downloaders. Both/I] are breaking copyright laws. The punishments are, rightly so, more severe for someone found to be supplying, than the person taking it for their own use (much like with drugs), but the fact is its both illegal.

 

Phoenix, I totally agree that it should be legally available online for download. Dont have a problem with that, but whether you like it or not, it is illegal (the downloading from non-authorised sites, that is, not the sites that legitimately supply tv downloads for a price). However it ended up that way, it is. And it is depriving those involved of royalties.

And yes, whilst there are people like yourself who buy plenty of DVDs, and are probably likely to buy the legal DVDs when they are released, I suspect that people like you are in the minority. The majority of people would download it, and keep the downloads, never bothering to buy them ("why should I, I already have them, and for free!!!").

 

See I used to think the same thing, and i'm sure it is true to some extent, but most the people I know who watch TV via the internet do indeed buy the stuff, maybe i just have highly moral friends, but legal or not, its not consumers that need to change, at the end of the day those are the people business are pandering to for their hard earned dollars, if they want it there way, you give it to them there way, because the masses don't give a crap if its legal or not, they still do it

I'd be interested to understand the legalitiies of watching a show on the internet that you already own, that would be an interesting court case if it ever happens

 

I do agree with you that they should change their models to suit what the current demand is.

Thats an interesting thought. I suppose the legality of it would be a bit of a grey area. Since you own the media (and assuming you are satisfying the copyright restrictions such as public presentation, etc), you could argue that its not illegal. Furthermore you could argue that you are merely taking a backup copy of the media - ok, you are taking a copy of the media someone else has backed up, but thats just to save you the hassle of having to back it up yourself!

 

well the issue of copyright infringement has always been from a lost revenue perspective, hence all the restrictions, and whilst on paper the law may say one thing, the very nature of the law was written to satisfy something, and if that something remains satisfied, then what crime has been permitted?


in DCMA terms having a backup of your DVD is illegal, whilst its fair use, you broke the DCMA by making the copy, thats one of those laws that makes everyone a criminal for no reason, they have tried to protect copyright at the wrong point of entry
its like putting your national borders 100 miles into international waters.. your making everyone who passes them a criminal when they are kind of obeying the law (international waters = free shipping, fair usage = i can copy my shite for backups)

the argument can get flipped, what can you do to someone who downloaded some TV then bought it, provided they did not share it and bought the show before any proceedings began? there are a few more reasons you could call them on it 'oh they might not of bought it if it was crap, sure, but if i had watched it on TV i might not of bought it, or watched another episode!

at the end of the day this industry is finally taking slow steps towards the corect model, i watch what i want, when i want, where i want, im the consumer, im paying for it, so stop ****ing with me
thats the correct model, and always has been
10 years ago we could not watch stuff anywhere but the TV of VHS, now we can watch it on mobile phones, pmps, computers, tvs, dvds, the internet browser i mean our choices are endless, lets start using them!

 

Well said...so many choices indeed...

You and Fergal both make interesting points...and like u, Phoenix, I do buy my DVDs...Hell u should see my box set collection...no where as big as yours Phoenix but its adequate enough...some DVDs I have bought more than once cos of new ones coming out...Star Wars and Superman are the two prime examples...What does boil me blood is when a big name film is released (Transformers, Spiderman et al), people I know dont go to the cinema to watch them! I mean hello...its all about the cinematic experience...yet again...it still goes back to the people who take their cameras into the cinema and record theses films who then make it available for people to download in the first place.

I really do hope the strike ends soon and like u Phoenix, they should have done this a long time ago...now cos of the strike the likes of the Golden Globes and possibly the Oscars will not even go ahead...at least not on TV anyway...such a shame really...since its that time of year when TV and movie get recognised...well movies mainly lol...

 

Someone might want that file... but it's not yours to distribute.

 

but what if it is yours to distribute? you hear of people who download films before seeing them in the cinema. some of those films that are available for download actually come from people who work within the movie industry! (Fergal, this is what I was trying to say earlier on!)

People who work on the inside are the ones making these files available to people. yes ok so the majority isnt them...but they are still part of the syndicate, so to speak.

So really...if the file is yours then u can do the hell u want with it...but I know what u r going to say regarding those who work within the industry...so I will let u say it

 

Sorry Noel you lost me. These films are not allowed to be re-distributed, period. It doesn't matter what nefarious source they came from, whether it be an insider or someone bootlegging with a video camera. The distribution rights are clear. The file is not yours to distribute.

 

If you OWN the film (or music, or software, or book), then YOU can distribute it. People who work on the inside don't own the film; it's the intellectual property (IP) of whoever (company or individual) owns it. The people who work on the inside are distributing it illegally, unless they own the company who owns the film, or the film is ACTUALLY theirs... not that they produced it, or directed it, or acted in it... but actually OWNS it.

Now, if you DO own the film, and you distribute it to me, then that's fine. But then, I still can't distribute it... unless I've got your permission to do so. As the owner, it would be your right, and ONLY your right, to allow certain people... or nobody, if you choose... to distribute it, or sell it, or give it away, or whatever. That's the thing... if you're the owner of the IP, you can choose whatever terms you want to give to whatever people or groups of people you want. If you want only one company to distribute your movie, you can choose to do so. If you want everyone to be able to distribute the content freely, you can choose to do so. If you want nobody to see your movie unless they buy it from your storefront, you can choose to do so.

If you're not the owner... then you can't make those decisions... you buy or rent or view or use the content in whatever manner the owner chooses to give to you. And if you don't like those terms... don't buy/rent/view/use the content. Either the owner will have to change the terms, or the owner won't make any revenue from the IP.

EDIT: When I say "own the film"... I don't mean "own a DVD copy of the film"... I mean, "own the intellectual property rights of the film." Only that individual or company has the right to do whatever they want with the intellectual property. If you don't like what terms they set out, don't rent/buy/use/view their content.

 

Exactly what I was expecting...Bluerinse this is what I was trying to say...BM has detailed exactly my point...if u made the film, tv show, music or software...then ur allowed to do whatever u want with it...u choose who to show it to...u choose who can redistribute it...cos u as the copyright owner can do that...thats what I am trying to get at...if I made a movie right now...I can upload it for u guys to download...then if I want, I can say ur allowed to copy or redistribute that video to only 5 people...

Yes the people who work within the industry are not allowed...yet u know fine well they are doing it...its the time line we live in that makes all these illegal felonies possible...eventually, one day, it will all be made legal...but no matter how hard they try, they cannot stop everyone from doing it the illegal way...

 

Not necessarily. I create practice exam questions all day long. But I don't own ANY of them; they're the IP of Boson Software. Thus, I can't choose who I want to give the content to, even though it came from MY mind.

Now, if I create something that isn't owned by another person or entity, then sure, I can distribute it however I like. Further, and more importantly, I can state how others are allowed (or not allowed) to distribute my work. Like you say, you can say that they are allowed to copy or redistribute to 5 people. You then can set the terms for those other "5 people", which can be different than the terms you set for the original batch of people. It's YOUR stuff, so YOU can choose the terms. The recipients can choose to accept the terms and use your stuff under those terms, or they can choose to reject the terms and not be allowed to use your stuff.

Just because those in the industry are doing it doesn't make it right or legal. Nor does it make it right for you or anyone else to be the recipient of their theft. No, they probably won't stop everyone from doing it illegally. But it doesn't change the illegality of it.

As far as whether it will be made legal... it's legal to do so NOW... *IF* the owners choose to make it legal. Dude, it's THEIR stuff. If you want to use it, use it under their terms, or don't use it. If enough people refuse to use their stuff, they'll change their terms or go broke.

I guess since I think that Porches are overpriced, I should be allowed to freely take one. Right? If not, what makes intellectual property different? Is it simply because it's not a physical hunk of metal and plastic put together a certain way? Is my work not worth buying? What makes it OK to steal the words I craft, or the music someone composes and performs, or the cinematic experience someone creates?

 

Yeah I hear ya man. Such a strange world we live in eh...

 

Somehow I didn't see this reply originally...

Yes, but that's an expense that I can avoid... it's not crucial to me to see a movie in hi-def when the normal DVD experience is quite enjoyable to me. I'd much rather spend that money on the kids, on a writing class for my wife, on my church, on the house mortgage, or on a car (when my '99 Altima decides to finally break down, hopefully years from now).