- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Industry response to Kodi, etc.
Posted on 12/28/15 at 10:56 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 12/28/15 at 10:56 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
that's just a funny statement by itself
I know. But from what I can gather, it is not illegal to simply view an illegal stream. I am not a copyright attorney so I might have skipped a statute that addresses this situation specifically. However, according to the way the statutes read now, by simply viewing an illegal stream, you are not reproducing a copyrighted work.
This post was edited on 12/28/15 at 10:57 am
0
Posted on 12/28/15 at 10:57 am to StrongBackWeakMind
quote:
You're not differentiating between illegally downloading and viewing an illegal stream. They are different in the eyes of the law.
No, they aren't. Not really. It's just that they can't catch you if you stream it as easily because there's no evidence on your computer. But it's still illegal. It's a proof issue, not a legality issue.
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:00 am to Baloo
quote:Explain it.
No, they aren't. Not really. It's just that they can't catch you if you stream it as easily because there's no evidence on your computer. But it's still illegal. It's a proof issue, not a legality issue.
This is the pertinent copyright law:
quote:I don't think viewing an illegal stream runs afoul of that law.
Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:
(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;
This post was edited on 12/28/15 at 11:02 am
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:01 am to Baloo
quote:
No. they weren't. Unless you were making a bunch of copies and then selling them. this is what the First Sale Doctrine is. You control the content that you purchased,so long as the use was private.
What about recording from a radio (which is what I did all the time as a kid, who didn't before MP3s?) I still bought albums, but sometimes you just wanted that one song.
quote:
Your comment was about legality, but it is also immoral. Of course it is. You are denying creators compensation for their art. They made something, you enjoyed it, you owe them money. That's how they make a living and get to keep making things. Now, the creator will sometimes put stuff out there for free, or will consent to fair use (a Blue Ray is clearly going to be played multiple times, and you don't always have to be alone in your house). But if you are trying to come up with an ethical way to deprive artists of their just compensation then... you're going to be looking for a long time.
I'm not and I agree.
quote:
Now, if you're a poor college kid, most of us will look the other way. But once you have a job, it is your duty as a part of the artistic community to be a patron. If you enjoy art, pay for it. That's how they get to make more.
Bingo. Like I said, back in the day, either through cost barriers or access barriers, I really think it's "ok," in that artists even would agree it's ok to steal. At least some of them. Heck, when I was really going through international film (between ages 16-22ish), it was almost impossible to find without buying every movie I wanted to watch. And that's just unrealistic, I'm sorry.
quote:
I'm not saying that if you've ever downloaded anything illegally, you're going to hell. You're not. But it is not ethical to do so, and if you're not paying for any art at all, then you're not just blowing past a stop sign, you're a reckless driver. I'll admit that I use Spotify to try out albums, and the artist sees almost no money out of that. But if I like what they made, then I will either buy a download of the album or if I really like it, get it on vinyl. But if I used it as a means to totally circumvent paying artists for their work, then that would be unethical (though, in this case, perfectly legal... Spotify is legalized theft, honestly... artists get completely hosed).
This. I'm certainly not trying to defend stealing, just that I don't think it's always black or white either.
This post was edited on 12/28/15 at 11:03 am
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:02 am to StrongBackWeakMind
quote:
I don't think viewing an illegal stream runs afoul of that law.
you don't see an unauthorized stream as being an unlawful reproduction of that property?
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:02 am to Baloo
quote:
No, they aren't. Not really. It's just that they can't catch you if you stream it as easily because there's no evidence on your computer. But it's still illegal. It's a proof issue, not a legality issue.
I have over 4TB's of movies and TV shows on several hard drives in my computer at home. The authorities aren't worried about me unless I am selling said media, or giving it to others. I don't think they really care unless you are trying to make money off it it. That's where they get mad and go after people.
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:03 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:The person hosting the stream is unlawfully reproducing/distributing it. I don't see how clicking play and viewing it is unlawful production/distribution. Nothing is being reproduced. It isn't going anywhere. No copies were made.
you don't see an unauthorized stream as being an unlawful reproduction of that property?
This post was edited on 12/28/15 at 11:04 am
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:04 am to StrongBackWeakMind
quote:
The person hosting the stream is unlawfully reproducing/distributing it. I don't see how clicking play and viewing it is unlawful production/distribution.
They also want people who get secondary high's incarcerated for selling weed, crack, meth....etc..
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:05 am to StrongBackWeakMind
quote:
The person hosting the stream is unlawfully reproducing/distributing it. I don't see how clicking play and viewing it is unlawful production/distribution. Nothing is being reproduced. It isn't going anywhere. No copies were made.
You're the last part of the distribution if you're clicking play.
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:07 am to StrongBackWeakMind
i think you can get arrested for viewing movies at illegal theaters, for a tactile/real world example
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:07 am to Fewer Kilometers
The viewer is definitely on the receiving end of the distribution, but he is not distributing.
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:08 am to Kracka
quote:
They also want people who get secondary high's incarcerated for selling weed, crack, meth....etc..
i don't
i would like a revisiting of our IP laws
but the "don't care" response is just bad policy in itself and that's not a legit argument to me
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:09 am to SlowFlowPro
I'm gonna look into that.
I don't want to turn this into a bitch fest, I'm just honestly curious. I did some research on it a few years back when I was watching UFC a bunch and they were going after people, but I didn't find anything in the statutes that addressed the illegal viewer.
I don't want to turn this into a bitch fest, I'm just honestly curious. I did some research on it a few years back when I was watching UFC a bunch and they were going after people, but I didn't find anything in the statutes that addressed the illegal viewer.
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:10 am to StrongBackWeakMind
that's going to be the best tactile example that may have some case law or precedent
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:12 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i would like a revisiting of our IP laws
I would, too, but... good luck with that. They are tilted so heavily in favor of large corporations and content providers and against consumers and creators themselves that it is unlikely we will ever see them revisited. The system already benefits those with the deepest pockets and biggest political pull.
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:14 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i don't
Doesn't mean a lot aren't. There are tons of people, mainly lawyers, lobbyist, etc. who want that type of stuff to be prosecuted. And like I said earlier. Downloading, watching illegal streams is and should be only punished when the person is seeking monetary gain from it. I have tons of movies and tv shows, and I don't advertise any for sale or giving any away. I just keep for my own personal entertainment. No different from Weed, and that's going to be legal everywhere before long. You set up a sensible distribution plan, that is practical, and not overpriced, people will take part in it.
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:16 am to Baloo
quote:
They are tilted so heavily in favor of large corporations
oh you mean like Disney and Mickey Mouse?
Posted on 12/28/15 at 11:30 am to SlowFlowPro
Well... yes. They are a prime villain here. And lets be honest, so is Stan Lee/Marvel Comics, so that was a marriage made in heaven. The way they screwed over Ditko and Kirby is legendary. Legal, but evil.
I'm actually more concerned with how copyrights don't protect creators, they protect the financial interests that control them. It's like the laws are written to protect the Pope, not Michaelangelo.
I'm actually more concerned with how copyrights don't protect creators, they protect the financial interests that control them. It's like the laws are written to protect the Pope, not Michaelangelo.
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News