nlinecomputers Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Sorry suppling ANYONE other then yourself with a copy is NOT personal use. Now if your friend buys the book and THEN you enlarge it. That would be legal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peachy Posted August 22, 2004 Author Share Posted August 22, 2004 Another example. There was a story in the Canadian media (can't recall the source at the moment) about how the copyright police were trying to sue a dentist because he played his radio when he worked on his patients. Something about him not paying a licence fee for over-the-air broadcasting of music to a public audience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRD Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Sorry suppling ANYONE other then yourself with a copy is NOT personal use. Now if your friend buys the book and THEN you enlarge it. That would be legal.Perhaps I wasn't clear...That is exactly what I meant...You would be copying a work that the person already owns for [HIS] use not yours.What if you re-type the book your friend currently owns in larger font, because he can't read his current copyprobably should read "for your friend" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nlinecomputers Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 As long as he retains the copy it would be legal. How you obtain a copy is not of concern to the owner of a copyright. You can pay anyone to make you a backup copy for your personal use. You can even pay the owner of the copyright by buying a new copy of the book. Or you can do the work yourself. If you can obtain the labor and material to make a copy for free that is a bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peachy Posted August 22, 2004 Author Share Posted August 22, 2004 And I ask again, If I have paid for the work in the form of an LP, cassette or CD am I a thief for downloading it as an MP3 from a P2P network?Then this example would be consistent with the enlarging the book example. You could argue that I don't have any ripping software, or my record player is broken, but I already own a copy on LP, I just want it in digital format. So, no, I wouldn't call you a thief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRD Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 That is my point...If I own the CD, why is it illegal for me to download it in a different form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ross549 Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 That is a legitimate use for downloading. However, it would probably be quicker to rip it yourself. you would also have more control over the quality of the MP3's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nlinecomputers Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 It isn't. But somehow I doubt that every MP3 you have you have the corresponding tape, record, or cd..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ross549 Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 My roommate had a case of 200 CD's stolen. He was rebuilding his collection by downloading from WinMX. Granted, i think he was downloading more that what he had on disc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peachy Posted August 22, 2004 Author Share Posted August 22, 2004 My sister used to work for a post-production sound company. When I visited her last Christmas her company happened to be working Mel Gibson's The Passion of Christ and I peeked at her open Excel spreadsheet on her iMac (she has it sitting on her kitchen counter and I was cooking ; honest!) Anyway, the spreadsheet was a costing of the music used in the movie. For the right to use brief excerpts from various classical music pieces they were paying $5,000-10,000 a song! No wonder the labels behave like crack dealers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRD Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 With a high speed connection, Its sometimes easier to just DL the song. Or at least it used to be. I stopped using P2P long long ago...about the same time I stopped buying new CD's.NO ONE in my household buys anything new from artists or companies that support or deal with the RIAA. If I can't get it used or from respectible, right thinking artists I don't buy it. It gives me great pleasure to know that they are no longer gaining revenue from me or my family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nlinecomputers Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 My sister used to work for a post-production sound company. When I visited her last Christmas her company happened to be working Mel Gibson's The Passion of Christ and I peeked at her open Excel spreadsheet on her iMac (she has it sitting on her kitchen counter and I was cooking ; honest!) Anyway, the spreadsheet was a costing of the music used in the movie. For the right to use brief excerpts from various classical music pieces they were paying $5,000-10,000 a song! No wonder the labels behave like crack dealers!Well considering how much music adds to the enjoyment of a movie and that movies are seen(hopefully) by millions or even billions of people I'd say that is cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRD Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Well considering how much music adds to the enjoyment of a movie and that movies are seen(hopefully) by millions or even billions of people I'd say that is cheap.Depends on how you define cheap...$12+ for a movie ticket isn't cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nlinecomputers Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Depends on how you define cheap...$12+ for a movie ticket isn't cheap.Exactly. They get $10 a head plus DVD rentals, TV etc. And they only pay $5000 for a song. That is cheap. I wish I could get that kind of markup..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRD Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 It isn't. But somehow I doubt that every MP3 you have you have the corresponding tape, record, or cd..... Speaking from personal experience? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peachy Posted August 22, 2004 Author Share Posted August 22, 2004 Well considering how much music adds to the enjoyment of a movie and that movies are seen(hopefully) by millions or even billions of people I'd say that is cheap.I hope they have a sliding scale if I ever decide to incorporate copyrighted music into a Flash video I put on the web... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ross549 Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 With a high speed connection, Its sometimes easier to just DL the song. Or at least it used to be. I stopped using P2P long long ago...about the same time I stopped buying new CD's.In my roommate's experience, it would have been much easier to rip the CD. The sound quality is sometimes horrible (why do people rip at 96Kb/sec??? , and getting the files was sometimes a real hassle, especially if your tastes are more eclectic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil P Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 That is not even the point.There is nothing illegal about sharing files or creating software that allows people to share files.I suppose you are one of the people who want to make guns illegal because people commit crimes with them. What the ****, lets throw in cars. People commit crimes with cars. And knives, computers, ink pens...people break the law with ink pens every day. Lets get rid of them too......*shakes head in disgust*Edit: The stealing, trading, swapping...what ever you want to call it... of intellectual property is wrong. Period. At one time I was a pirate of a magnitude that would startle everyone on this forum. And I truly mean startle. I ran with the big boys of the piracy "scene". I left that hobby behind a couple of years ago. For the longest time I never really considered it stealing. As I grew older I began to truly see it for what it was. Stealing.Woah. Heh, this one got out of hand. Posted this late at night and forgot about it (till just now when I saw the dot that said I'd posted)While I do participate in downloading music, it will usually lead to a purchase of whatever CD that song comes from (sure, that doesn't make it legal or morally right, but whatever), I do not download any movies, or computer software (ok, that last part is a lie. All of my software is libre )Again, I do realize that it is illegal, and morally wrong (and just downloading music doesn't make it less wrong). That having been said, my downloading has decreased dramatically over time. However, your generalization is completely uncalled for here.What I posted was half-intended as a joke, but apparently this is a touchy subject.Neil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stryder Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 SFFLMy post was in reply to Marsden, not you bud.My only point is that P2P in and of itself is not illegal. P2P is nothing more than an easy way to share files. A dumbed down FTP server. Just because people use it for illegal means does not mean that the concept and resulting technology is illegal.Any crime that is being committed is being committed by the end user and that is where the responsibility should lay, not with the software and its makers. They are just writing dumbed down server software. That is all P2P really is.There are 2 reasons the entertainment industry is going after P2P makers like they are.1. It is easier to sue a company (or a handful of companies) than it is to try and sue millions of end users.2. They want nothing more than to see P2P ruled illegal because it is not only a threat where piracy is concerned, that is just the rallying cry. Piracy is small fries in the big picture. Their true concern is that P2P is a threat to their distribution market that they have had cornered for decades. Their biggest concern is that bands will no longer need them in the near future.....not piracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRD Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Perfectly stated Stryder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lewmur Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Another example. There was a story in the Canadian media (can't recall the source at the moment) about how the copyright police were trying to sue a dentist because he played his radio when he worked on his patients. Something about him not paying a licence fee for over-the-air broadcasting of music to a public audience.Don't know about Canada, but this was settled in US courts about 1986. The U.S. Supreme Court handed ASCAP one of its few losses over just this issue. The Men's Retail Assoc took the side of Retailers who were playing broadcast music in their stores rather than paying for MUSAC. The court ruled that, because the broadcast were over the PUBLIC airwaves, ASCAP couldn't prevent playing of the music. The only proviso was that the Retailer could not *charge* patrons listening.I have felt ever since then that bar owners should form an organization to fight the NFL over its black-out rules, using the same grounds. So far, without such an organization, none have had the guts to face the stiff fines or the cost of a court battle all the way to the Supreme Court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsden11 Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 The 9th Circuit’s ruling will be overturned... Why? Intent... If I'm walking down the street late at night and the police stop me... and I'm found to be carrying known "burglar tools".... I'll be arrested for possession of those tools even though I have not broken into any car or building, nor am I carrying anything on my person which is "stolen." I'm locked up because there is intent. A normal person is not walking around with these tools late at night...The Supreme Court will rule that companies that make the P2P software have done so with certain intent. The "burglar tools" are not manufactured as such separately but in a certain combination, they constitute intent…I believe society is made up of basically two types of people… creators and users. Creators create content which user want to consume. Users want the lowest price. Look at all the price comparison sites that have sprung up all over the Web. Everyone wants a deal! P2P has made stealing very easy. Look at spam… Get the lowest prices on Viagra; get your cheap copy of MS Office 2000 here; get your refi here-- we have the lowest rates in the business… Before the internet, if you didn’t want to pay for a new record, you might try to steal it out of the store. If you were lucky you might not get caught. Along comes the Internet and look how easy it is to steal… no one is watching, no cameras recording… just a few mouse clicks and bingo… I, the user, just saved $19 bucks plus sales tax. Woohoo! What a deal… once we learned that is easy and no one is watching… it snowballs down from there.I’m not in favor of the record companies… they are all crooks living off the backs of the creators… but stealing from them is not the answer. Want to see lower prices on music CDs? Stop buying… stop downloading… stop listening. They would wake up real fast…But saying one is more evil than the other to justify illegal behavior is wrong. We all have the right to defend ourselves against physical attack. We do not have the right to walk up to a perfect stranger and knock their head off with a 2x4…We all have incredible power… we all know right from wrong…Perhaps if we could see the end results from stealing content, we might think differently. If we could see the record label employee get laid off due to lower than expected sales. That person going home and explaining to the family that Christmas will be a bit light this year and see the disappointment in the eyes of the last people in that direct food chain… But naw… we want those amazing deals… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lewmur Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 The 9th Circuit’s ruling will be overturned... Why? Intent...Sorry. The 9th circuit already ruled on the "intent" issue. Unlike your burglar tools, there are legitimate uses for P2P. And, "intent" is very difficult to prove in a court of law. P2P, via Bittorent and the like, is a mainstay in the Linux community. It is used relieve the load on mirror sites when new distros or major updates come on line. "Sharing" in that community is a way-of-life and not illegal. Or immoral.BTW, M$ could use a bit of "sharing" at the present time to get SP2 distributed!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stryder Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 The 9th Circuit’s ruling will be overturned... Why? Intent... If I'm walking down the street late at night and the police stop me... and I'm found to be carrying known "burglar tools".... I'll be arrested for possession of those tools even though I have not broken into any car or building, nor am I carrying anything on my person which is "stolen." I'm locked up because there is intent. A normal person is not walking around with these tools late at night...This aint about justification, because we all know downloading/sharing copywrited material is wrong. It is stealing. I agree with you 100%. But there are too many legit uses for P2P technology to prove intent. P2P technology itself is just dumbed down server software. It does nothing illegal. Just like guns, cars, computers and countless other products....they do nothing illegal. It takes a person using them in the wrong way to make using them a crime. The manufacturer is not responsible.....the end user is. Just like with your burgular tools. They are not going to close down the manufacturers of those tools. They are going to arrest the end user for using them illegally. That is how it should be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nlinecomputers Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 If I'm walking down the street late at night and the police stop me... and I'm found to be carrying known "burglar tools"Sorry unless a crime of burglary has been committed in the area simply carrying tools is NOT a crime. Even if the police suspect your intent. They can't even stop you unless you match a description, try to evade the police, or perform some other act that is suspect.As for P2P programs I agree the most of the use of it is illegal however many companies and individuals use it as a legitmate means of distribution. Mandrake for example releases it's software via bittorrent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.