213374U Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 Linky! Official Notice From a legal standpoint they have every the right to do that... but it's obvious they aren't really accomplishing anything. In fact, I think they are shooting themselves in the foot. Thoughts? - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.
Oerwinde Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 I personally don't see any difference between taping something from TV and lending it to a friend... which is legal, and taping it from TV and putting it on the internet. The area between the balls and the butt is a hotbed of terrorist activity.
Nartwak Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 How about taping something from TV and lending to two hundred million friends forever?
metadigital Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 How about taping something from TV and lending to two hundred million friends forever? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> "Off-site mutilple-redundancy-tolerant archive" OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
Kaftan Barlast Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 The same people are also trying to make TiVO illegal because it allows you to fast forward commercials.. DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. "
metadigital Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 That's the kind of backward-facing mentality we need! Don't make the commercials more interesting, make them mandatory. OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
Kaftan Barlast Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 The daft thing is that instead of fooling the sponsors that the commercials still work, they're looking into more insidious ways to do product placement and perhaps even "blip commercials" which would mean a short 5sec commercial at random points every 1 minute or so. We're trying our best in Sweden to fight back, recently the guild of directors won a lawsuit against Tv4 that made it an infringement against the "artistic integrity" rights of their works to interrupt any of their films with commercials :D yay! Scoreboard good : 32 evil : 289309371261 " DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. "
metadigital Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 The daft thing is that instead of fooling the sponsors that the commercials still work, they're looking into more insidious ways to do product placement and perhaps even "blip commercials" which would mean a short 5sec commercial at random points every 1 minute or so. We're trying our best in Sweden to fight back, recently the guild of directors won a lawsuit against Tv4 that made it an infringement against the "artistic integrity" rights of their works to interrupt any of their films with commercials :D yay! Scoreboard good : 32 evil : 289309371261 " <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The British film industry must be on the wrong side of your vinculum, then: certainly any modern James Bond film would be about 26 sseconds long if you removed the product placements ... OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
213374U Posted May 14, 2005 Author Posted May 14, 2005 I personally don't see any difference between taping something from TV and lending it to a friend... which is legal, and taping it from TV and putting it on the internet. Well, I read somewhere that if you tape it without the commercials and then lend it, the MPAA will sue your ass and then you will get thrown into the especially built gulag on Venus for the rest of your life. At any rate, this is stupid. Instead of finding ways to cope with the demand for this kind of stuff, they are just pissing everyone off. They are not increasing their profit, they are not protecting the industry, and they are most definitely not encouraging people to respect copyright laws. I mean, with this kind of actions, I feel like downloading stuff just to do what they don't want me to do. So what the hell are they thinking? Oh well. Welcome to Lawyer Rampage! - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.
Kaftan Barlast Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 An other thing with it thats really idiotic is that its illegal for me to download programs I have payed for through my cable subscription. If I record "the daily show" on my HD video and then watch it later, thats fine. If I burn it on DVD and lend it to a friend, thats totally ok. But if I download the same episode , its suddenly illegal even though IVE PAID FOR IT(!) DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. "
Darth Flatus Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 The p2p system via which TV shows are distributed isnt illegal, the indexing sites arent illegal, sky+ and tivo arent illegal and this is just a similar principle to tivo and sky+ so where's the problem?
213374U Posted May 14, 2005 Author Posted May 14, 2005 But if I download the same episode , its suddenly illegal even though IVE PAID FOR IT(!) Right. However, if you use a P2P program to download, you might be allowing others who haven't paid to get it as well, since you can't control who downloads from you. The p2p system via which TV shows are distributed isnt illegal, the indexing sites arent illegal, sky+ and tivo arent illegal and this is just a similar principle to tivo and sky+ so where's the problem? The problem is that you don't hold any licenses over that material. Thus, you are not authorized by the owner of the intellectual property to distribute it in any way. Alas, they do have legal basis to do this. Which doesn't preclude the fact that they are just wasting time and money, and making a lot of people hate them and all they stand for. Damn shame that tarring is considered assault nowadays. - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.
Nartwak Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 An other thing with it thats really idiotic is that its illegal for me to download programs I have payed for through my cable subscription. If I record "the daily show" on my HD video and then watch it later, thats fine. If I burn it on DVD and lend it to a friend, thats totally ok. But if I download the same episode , its suddenly illegal even though IVE PAID FOR IT(!) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Downloading the show isn't the problem, it's them uploading to your computer that's the problem. where's the problem? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The unauthorized distribution of intellectual property is the illegal part.
Kaftan Barlast Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 where's the problem? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That this man will come to my house and pwn me DISCLAIMER: Do not take what I write seriously unless it is clearly and in no uncertain terms, declared by me to be meant in a serious and non-humoristic manner. If there is no clear indication, asume the post is written in jest. This notification is meant very seriously and its purpouse is to avoid misunderstandings and the consequences thereof. Furthermore; I can not be held accountable for anything I write on these forums since the idea of taking serious responsability for my unserious actions, is an oxymoron in itself. Important: as the following sentence contains many naughty words I warn you not to read it under any circumstances; botty, knickers, wee, erogenous zone, psychiatrist, clitoris, stockings, bosom, poetry reading, dentist, fellatio and the department of agriculture. "I suppose outright stupidity and complete lack of taste could also be considered points of view. "
Nartwak Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 Hmm... policemen that give out prison brochures before arresting you. Swanky.
Darth Flatus Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 Instead of bullying filesharers they should just develop a viable alternative - some kind of tivo on demand with a well thought out DRM system. bleh, it wont happen
Nartwak Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 they should just develop a viable alternative - some kind of tivo on demand with a well thought out DRM system. bleh, it wont happen <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh, totally.
Lucius Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 I fear this one more than yours Kaftan. Killer boots btw. DENMARK! It appears that I have not yet found a sig to replace the one about me not being banned... interesting.
metadigital Posted May 14, 2005 Posted May 14, 2005 I think a radical re-structuring is required to prevent a revolution. Micropayments, which would require a new technology: virtual money Virtual Money would be based on encryption of the IP; the (time-limited) key being given for a fee; using micro-payments (tiny fractions of pennies). It needs to be decentralized (no way are you going to have some Ministry of Free Information that oversees every transaction) and automatic. I have no problem paying for someone else's idea, as long as it is reasonable and convenient. Prohibition doesn't work. History proves that. OBSCVRVM PER OBSCVRIVS ET IGNOTVM PER IGNOTIVS OPVS ARTIFICEM PROBAT
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now