Are You One of 23,000 Defendants in the US' Biggest Illegal Download Lawsuit?

Originally posted by mblahnikluver
reply to post by maestromason

 

Sorry I am not feeling sorry for people who get paid millions to do nothing of great importance.

I agree with you

I own the property I buy.

Not the government or the corporations.

So much for us having a 'FREE MARKET' when the government and the corporations think they own in perpetuity our own property.

reply to post by mblahnikluver


Great importance is relative. I don't watch TV (except for 1 or 2 shows a year). Most of that is of no importance to me at all, but it is the breath of life to 95% of America. I also don't patronize sporting events. I like playing a little ball with my kids, but I wouldn't waste a thin dime on games or gear for professional athletics. Most people I have met are at least mildly interested in those. Most video games and movies are likewise unimportant. As is just about every job at every major corporation you can name. What could be less interesting or important then cogs in a grinding wheel? The entire financial services sector is garbage. I have never even heard of a worthwhile politician. I hate war and believe that the only legitimate expenditure for defense is in protecting your own homeland. Any doctor that doesn't care for the sick or injured, regardless of their ability to pay: useless. Restaurants? I'm a fairly good cook and don't care for the blandness of most commercially prepared food. Cars, boats, jet-ski's and motorcycles? Trinkets and toys. The list goes on and on.

Lets be honest: Most of the "jobs" out there are fairly useless, in the cosmic sense. Are musicians and artists fighting fires? Of course not. Nevertheless -- I personally wouldn't want to live in a world without literature, or music. It's what resonates with me. Who am I to judge what resonates with you? Or what has "worth / value" in your eyes?

Originally posted by 0zzymand0s
reply to post by mblahnikluver

 

Great importance is relative. I don't watch TV (except for 1 or 2 shows a year). Most of that is of no importance to me at all, but it is the breath of life to 95% of America. I also don't patronize sporting events. I like playing a little ball with my kids, but I wouldn't waste a thin dime on games or gear for professional athletics. Most people I have met are at least mildly interested in those. Most video games and movies are likewise unimportant. As is just about every job at every major corporation you can name. What could be less interesting or important then cogs in a grinding wheel? The entire financial services sector is garbage. I have never even heard of a worthwhile politician. I hate war and believe that the only legitimate expenditure for defense is in protecting your own homeland. Any doctor that doesn't care for the sick or injured, regardless of their ability to pay: useless. Restaurants? I'm a fairly good cook and don't care for the blandness of most commercially prepared food. Cars, boats, jet-ski's and motorcycles? Trinkets and toys. The list goes on and on.

Lets be honest: Most of the "jobs" out there are fairly useless, in the cosmic sense. Are musicians and artists fighting fires? Of course not. Nevertheless -- I personally wouldn't want to live in a world without literature, or music. It's what resonates with me. Who am I to judge what resonates with you? Or what has "worth / value" in your eyes?

It sounds like you've got it all figured out. Well done to you.

Originally posted by EternalThought
This is ridiculous!

Do you know how many Chinese illegally download these movies online then burn copies on disk and sell them on the street?? How ill they track them down?

They won't.

Just like the jihadists, they go after soft, easy targets, not effective ones.

THEY are the terrorists.

If you stop torrenting, the terrorists win.

Originally posted by alphabetaone

I see it like this, that someone goes to an auto showroom, see the price tag on a new auto, cant afford it/wont afford it, and instead asks someone else to steal the car for them, as opposed to having an intermediary somewhere that sells the auto at wholesale.

For all intents and purposes, that is precisely whats happening isn't it?

No.

It's more like someone goes to an auto showroom, sees a car they like, that blanches at the 75k price tag, so goes home and builds one of their own. The car in the showroom is still there, and can still be sold, provided the seller can find someone willing to pay that price. If he cannot, then a prudent action would be to lower the price to manageable levels, or risk being stuck with a pricey white elephant forever.

If he lowers the price sufficiently, then the incentive for Joe to go home and build his own car vanishes - it becomes more reasonable to buy one already built, and the car seller profits from more sales in lieu of home builds.

Originally posted by leejohnbarnes
The corporate fascist state even tells us what to do with our own property.

When you buy a CD - you buy a product - you buy the disc and the music on it.

That property belongs to you.

It is YOURS, not the person who made the music / movie on that tape.

You buy the music - it is yours.

The capitalist state has now become the communist state - in that they want to control your own property and tell you what you can and cannot do with your own property.

The idea that we do not own our property and that the state can control what we do with our own property is pure communism, and yet the greedy little capitalists and their corporate sock puppets peddle this communism and accept without even analysing it for themselves.

Get real you commies.

If a performer wants to ensure he has control over his music 100 % and owns his musci in perpetuity - then just do live shows and charge people to go to those shows.

That way the people present cannot own what they sing at the live gig.

I cannot believe that so may people have fallen for this communist rubbish peddled by the anti-downloading Stalinists.

They talk about protecting capitalism whilst peddling communism.

The record companies would not dispute that the tangible property belongs to you. They wouldn't dispute that the music is yours to listen to whenever you want. As RelentlessLurker has pointed out, at the moment it may even be legal for you to make an additional copy of that for personal use within your home or car. Certainly on some sorts of digital formats for the time being.

The concept that you only license the music on there is a legal necessity. If they actually sold that music to you then once you legally owned that music you could do whatever you wanted with it quite legally, including selling it on.

Anyone who flagged RelentlessLurker's posts should be ashamed of themselves.

Go look up the definition of 'intellectual property', you geniuses.

Originally posted by edog11

Are You One of 23,000 Defendants in the US' Biggest Illegal Download Lawsuit?

techland.time.com

Did you illegally download a copy of The Expendables, Sylvester Stallone's old-school macho get-together fight-fest from last year? If so, watch your inbox: You're likely one of the more than 23,000 file sharers being sued for doing so by the US Copyright Group in what is now the largest BitTorrent downloading case in US legal history.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.wired.com
www.wired.com

That is why you never download, ever. Always stream it, then they can't sue you only the website that is doing the streaming(and if they do, counter sue for harassment). Because if you download it= distributing an illegal copy. Streaming= walking down an alley and seeing a neighbor with his/her large scale projector showing the moving outside illegally.

reply to post by Abney


you cant flag a post, genius.

I think people are ignoring the elephant in the room.
And that is that a lot of movies are uploaded by people in the industry.
From Cinema workers upwards.

While there is no punishment for the uploaders of the original torrent and the person who downloads is the criminal, then there is ABSOLUTELY NO INCENTIVE for people to stop UPLOADING in the first place.

And it is fairly obvious that because there is a huge billion dollar cottage industry growing around chasing the downloaders, you have to ask the question.......

Are a LOT OF TORRENTS uploaded by those who have the most to profit from at the other end?
I'd make a bet right now that it is going on and is endemic.

I'm sure this little nugget will be exposed in due course.

Reply to post by Abney

How exactly is someone downloading an mp3 or movie different from getting a copy from a friend?

Can I make a Xerox of a chapter of a book to peruse at my pleasure? Now, how about an audio track?

Last, if we do not own the music on the CD we just bought, how is it that we can sell the same CD, sometimes even for a profit?


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Reply to post by Abney

 

How exactly is someone downloading an mp3 or movie different from getting a copy from a friend?

Can I make a Xerox of a chapter of a book to peruse at my pleasure? Now, how about an audio track?

Last, if we do not own the music on the CD we just bought, how is it that we can sell the same CD, sometimes even for a profit?

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

In reality there is no difference between downloading an mp3 and obtaining it from your friend but the laws in place cannot acount for every possibility. The truth be told, the law in this area is struggling with the technology that's constantly coming out. That means that the laws made end up been sweeping to try and cover most scenarios that exist now and into the near future. As we've seen over the last 15 years this doesn't always work. So to answer your question while there's no difference and the music industry wouldn't pursue renumeration from you and your friend duplicating music, 'they' know that with peer to peer sharing that the wording in the Act as it stands is out of date and that sharing with peer to peer is not the same as sharing with your friend.

You can make a xerox copy of your book for your own use. You can make a copy of your audio track for your own use, although even that under the current act is still a bit murky, only because the ease at which a digital copy can get redistributed. I don't think the law will ever change on your rights to allow you to make duplicates for your personal use. Especially if you've legally paid for them to begin with.

I may get corrected here by someone but I believe that If you buy a CD you can sell the CD on for a profit. Certainly with software there is a Transfer to aThird Party clause on the agreement that you click on you go theough the instalation rocess (that we all never read). This allows you to do a one time transfer of all the original media, disc, certificate, key etc. But then, the agreement says, you must remove the software from your computer - technically you should remove it before you sell/transfer it. Now 'I think' its the same with a CD or DVD, you can sell or transfer that disc once but any copies you have made must be deleted or erased but I'm willing to be corrected on that.

reply to post by leejohnbarnes


You own the HARD Copy ONLY. You DO NOT own the CONTENT which is a big word for ya I know...COPYRIGHTED.
(READ THAT NOTICE AT THE BEGINNING OF EVERY MOVIE)

Its there for a reason.

Has anyone in Canada received anythng regarding this garbage south of the border, or is it purely US based?

reply to post by Jocko Flocko


I have only heard of one guy in quebec getting sued, and the retarded quebec court I think it was upheld it. But it was not for this, it was for "spamming" ads on facebook....

I say screw the US federal government, I am sick of them strong arming other countries to go along with their corporate moneymaking schemes. Anyone other than someone in bed with the government that tried to sue someone for 1000% of their not even proven losses, would have their case tossed out as frivilous right off the bat.

reply to post by region331




When you buy a car, does the car company still own a license over it if you decide to sell it on ?

No.

Its your property.

The issue is simply the fundamental basis of property rights - if you own that property it is yours.

If you decide to make a CD and sell it - then the CD becomes the property of the seller including the music on the CD.

YOU DONT OWN THE COPYRIGHT ON THE MUSIC - the music copyright belongs to the person who wrote the song and if they decide to license others to copy their music then of course they should get copyright from people who use their songs and who perform their songs.

But the performer should not, though the law wrongfully says you do, own the music on the CD.

The cd owner does.

You own the HARD Copy ONLY. You DO NOT own the CONTENT which is a big word for ya I know...COPYRIGHTED.
(READ THAT NOTICE AT THE BEGINNING OF EVERY MOVIE)

Its there for a reason.


I know what copyright means mate.

I also know that the law says - and the law is wrong.

I also understand that trying to divide the CD and its content into two distinct things may be the law - but the law breaches the fundamental right of property.

To say I own a music CD and not the music content of the CD is total rubbish.

When I buy a CD I own the CD and the music.

The two are indivisible - its like saying when I buy a car that I own the body of the car but I do not own the cars engine.

Get real.

If i decide to take my Ford cars engine out and put it in another shell of a car made by Toyota - does Ford take me to court for 'infringement of copyright' of my unauthorised use of the Ford Engine that was in the Ford car I bought.

No.

The issue for the music / movie industry is that they have rejected all logic and become spiteful and greedy morons.

The ONLY people who should be being investigated and prosecuted for illegal distrobution are UPLOADERS not downloaders.

Those who UPLOAD a movie or CD should be the targets - not the downloaders.

ITS SIMPLE ;

NO UPLOADERS = NO DOWNLOADERS


That way the majority of the public would support a crackdown on uploaders, but the majority of the public do not support a crackdown on downloaders.

Taking to court and fining people who download a few music tracks hundreds of thousands of dollars merely brings the entire music industry and legal system into disrepute - and people will continue to upload and download just to say ' up yours' to the corporate fascists and the idiot justice system that undertake such fascist acts.

reply to post by leejohnbarnes


That is complete and utter bs. You can buy every single cd from a band but you will never own the music. Only way you can do that is to buy the copyright for those songs.

The band own the copyright on the songs they write.

They own the right to produce their songs and sell them on CD records and stop other people selling CDs with their songs on it and selling them for a profit.

They own the right to play them for money in public in concerts and to stop others doing so without their permission who also make a profit.

They own the right to allow people to record and sell those songs and to stop people doing so if they wish, as those people who record those songs also make a profit.

They own the right to publish those songs and to get money for the publishing rights, and to stop others making a profit from selling their songs.

But they do not own the right to tell me what to do with my own property, which is the CD i bought and the music on it.

Sure the law says they do have the right to tell me what to do with my own property which is the CD I bought - but the law is an ass and total BS.