|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:46 am
Acheta Well, I agree with both of you. I am against piracy, but I myself can't help it. You see, my life is music. And if my music was available in the stores, I'd but it for sure. But I live in Holland, and there's no way I can buy Japanese vocaloid music here. I rent movies from video stores and go to the cinema, but I do need google if I'm working for school projects. I see that as expanding my knowledge. However, there's indeed a lot of pirating going around. Of course I won't say I don't ilegally download music, as said before. I think they should go on sueing people, but not censor everything. I, and a lot of other people won't find anything we need anymore, may it be for school or to find new songs which aren't common at all in your country. There's a little rule that says it's not piracy if you're doing it for only your purpose. What I mean to say is that if you download it, and then put it onto some device for your own private use, that is not piracy. If you are trying to sell, say mixed albums, for a profit, that is piracy. This bill, if passed, is going to ignore that rule completely and begin suing people who are downloading music for private use (like myself, and most likely you). If the guy in the video (in my signature) is right, then if this bill passes into law, they can come to your home in Holland and expedite you here to America so that you can sit in our jails/prisons. They're already trying to do exactly this in other countries, and that's part of what this bill would allow.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 7:58 pm
Acheta maui boy no ka oi Miss Emni Rose Everyone I know and have talked to is against this. I've never seen America this united ever before. xp But seriously, though: when my art teacher says that SOPA is bad, you know things are being flushed down the toilet. SOPA is bad. But most people don't really know why it's bad. Most people against SOPA are the very same pirates that gave congress the tools they needed to propose SOPA in the first place. How many of the people you know listen to songs on youtube without paying for them? How many download/stream movies/TV series without paying? Piracy has become so rampant and so abundant, the average internet user sees absolutely nothing wrong with it. And THAT is the real problem here. Yes congress is stripping us of our liberties. Yes they are establishing an oligarchy where only the social elite have a valid opinion. But that has been going on for decades (maybe centuries). Only now that they're taking away the people's ability to steal s**t from other hard working people does the public finally say something's wrong. Only once people start pushing this much for open access media and fighting the corporate entities seeking to establish shill organizations to deprive the public of unbiased public media will I believe that people REALLY know why SOPA is bad. Well, I agree with both of you. I am against piracy, but I myself can't help it. You see, my life is music. And if my music was available in the stores, I'd but it for sure. But I live in Holland, and there's no way I can buy Japanese vocaloid music here. I rent movies from video stores and go to the cinema, but I do need google if I'm working for school projects. I see that as expanding my knowledge. However, there's indeed a lot of pirating going around. Of course I won't say I don't ilegally download music, as said before. I think they should go on sueing people, but not censor everything. I, and a lot of other people won't find anything we need anymore, may it be for school or to find new songs which aren't common at all in your country. It costs them more money to sue individual people over copyright infringement than it saves them if they got them to buy the song in the first place. At the moment, federal law against online piracy and warez distribution is extremely lenient (in order to be prosecuted, you must be shown to have copied at least $2000 worth in warez within a 180 day period). The SOPA act would actually be very effective at stifling the average person who only knows how to use the "youtube downloader" and limewire. It will do little in the way of dedicated warez distribution groups due to newsgroups, IRC channels, and private torrent trackers but they don't care about those guys. Those guys will always find a way around the law. As for google and s**t, no. As long as google complies and takes down anything that is copyright infringing, they won't be shut down. But what is the number one hub of online music piracy in all the net at the moment? Youtube. And who owns youtube? That's right. Now you see the big picture. Google knows that the only reason youtube is so immensely popular is because people get to listen/watch pirated media on their site. It's probably the biggest hub of media piracy in the entire world right now dwarfing even sites like TPB and 1337x. Less people visiting youtube=less revenue from advertisements=bad investment and potential monetary loss on google's part. From their history, google could give a s**t about public access and open source information. They've lied, deceived, and backstabbed so many people so many times in the back, they are even worse than Walmart. That's why I don't understand why people can be so against large corporations like Walmart and yet hold, for lack of a better word, evil corporations like Google to be some sort of hero of the people. But I'm getting off tangent now. There are alternatives to google such as Bing. For most people, sites like Bing, Yahoo, etc. will work just fine. Google is by far the largest and best collection of information, but most of the things people search for on google can easily be found on bing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:05 pm
Psychoholic Slag Acheta Well, I agree with both of you. I am against piracy, but I myself can't help it. You see, my life is music. And if my music was available in the stores, I'd but it for sure. But I live in Holland, and there's no way I can buy Japanese vocaloid music here. I rent movies from video stores and go to the cinema, but I do need google if I'm working for school projects. I see that as expanding my knowledge. However, there's indeed a lot of pirating going around. Of course I won't say I don't ilegally download music, as said before. I think they should go on sueing people, but not censor everything. I, and a lot of other people won't find anything we need anymore, may it be for school or to find new songs which aren't common at all in your country. There's a little rule that says it's not piracy if you're doing it for only your purpose. What I mean to say is that if you download it, and then put it onto some device for your own private use, that is not piracy. If you are trying to sell, say mixed albums, for a profit, that is piracy. This bill, if passed, is going to ignore that rule completely and begin suing people who are downloading music for private use (like myself, and most likely you). If the guy in the video (in my signature) is right, then if this bill passes into law, they can come to your home in Holland and expedite you here to America so that you can sit in our jails/prisons. They're already trying to do exactly this in other countries, and that's part of what this bill would allow. Where the hell did you get that? There is a legal exception called fair use, but it does not condone unlawful replication for personal use. It condones replication (to a very fickle and limited degree) to artistic interpretation, education, and other uses that do not include the original intent of the work. For example: if I were to use a local Hawaiian song in a documentary about Hawaii without permission from the artist, it MIGHT constitute fair use. But if I were to download that same song, stick it on my mp3 player unaltered, and listen to it (as it was marketed to be used), that is criminal copyright infringement and can constitute a lawsuit in civil court. Fair use is a VERY hazy subject that varies on a case by case basis. Two people can do almost the exact same thing and the ruling could be completely different because of one small little variable. For example, someone could use a Lady Gaga song in its entirety for an AMV about whale blubber and be sued successfully while another person could take that same song for use in a rant/protest against Kmart or something and get off without the slightest bit of repercussion because of the way the song was made to be interpreted (as an expression of free speech rather than one of entertainment). In short, if you're gonna try to fall back on fair use as your main legal defense, you're just looking to get your a** handed to you in court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 10:22 am
maui boy no ka oi Where the hell did you get that? There is a legal exception called fair use, but it does not condone unlawful replication for personal use. It condones replication (to a very fickle and limited degree) to artistic interpretation, education, and other uses that do not include the original intent of the work. For example: if I were to use a local Hawaiian song in a documentary about Hawaii without permission from the artist, it MIGHT constitute fair use. But if I were to download that same song, stick it on my mp3 player unaltered, and listen to it (as it was marketed to be used), that is criminal copyright infringement and can constitute a lawsuit in civil court. Fair use is a VERY hazy subject that varies on a case by case basis. Two people can do almost the exact same thing and the ruling could be completely different because of one small little variable. For example, someone could use a Lady Gaga song in its entirety for an AMV about whale blubber and be sued successfully while another person could take that same song for use in a rant/protest against Kmart or something and get off without the slightest bit of repercussion because of the way the song was made to be interpreted (as an expression of free speech rather than one of entertainment). In short, if you're gonna try to fall back on fair use as your main legal defense, you're just looking to get your a** handed to you in court. I don't know, that's just what I've always been told. You still couldn't get in trouble for putting a song onto an MP3 player if you own the CD and then put the song there. That would just be stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 8:24 pm
Psychoholic Slag maui boy no ka oi Where the hell did you get that? There is a legal exception called fair use, but it does not condone unlawful replication for personal use. It condones replication (to a very fickle and limited degree) to artistic interpretation, education, and other uses that do not include the original intent of the work. For example: if I were to use a local Hawaiian song in a documentary about Hawaii without permission from the artist, it MIGHT constitute fair use. But if I were to download that same song, stick it on my mp3 player unaltered, and listen to it (as it was marketed to be used), that is criminal copyright infringement and can constitute a lawsuit in civil court. Fair use is a VERY hazy subject that varies on a case by case basis. Two people can do almost the exact same thing and the ruling could be completely different because of one small little variable. For example, someone could use a Lady Gaga song in its entirety for an AMV about whale blubber and be sued successfully while another person could take that same song for use in a rant/protest against Kmart or something and get off without the slightest bit of repercussion because of the way the song was made to be interpreted (as an expression of free speech rather than one of entertainment). In short, if you're gonna try to fall back on fair use as your main legal defense, you're just looking to get your a** handed to you in court. I don't know, that's just what I've always been told. You still couldn't get in trouble for putting a song onto an MP3 player if you own the CD and then put the song there. That would just be stupid. Yes you can. The whole debate as to whether old generation ROM data is legal to create has been an issue for some time now. On one hand, it's the only way to protect their games from damage and back their data up if ever they would need it. On the other hand, it's unlawful replication that is 100% illegal in the US. I believe there are some foreign countries who have more lenient laws regarding backups of purchased digital goods but I can't name them off the top of my head. Still you shouldn't believe everything you're told. Here's a good overview of criminal copyright law regarding warez (electronic goods) trading in particular. It gives a brief look into the complex web of technicalities that is copyright law in the US. http://pdf.textfiles.com/academics/warezcriminalcopyright.pdf
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 10:56 pm
Thank you for the document, I will read it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
