obama admin iracy crackdown

No Limit said:
Except that on average you upload as much as 50% of a song while the download takes place. And by far the majority of torrent users don't turn off seeding.

But I'm curious, why wouldn't you test it? According to what you defined as "1 copy" that only defines the entire file, there is no other way to read that. That means I have nothing to worry about by opening such a site unless your definition of "1 copy" is wrong (it is).
Click to expand...

50% is not "all but the last second", which is what I was refuting.
I wouldn't test it because various legal systems, UK and USA included have a horrible ability to "interprett" the law in some rather twisted ways, depending on if the court "thinks" what you did was wrong. And no, I can't "prove" that, but that dosen't change it being true.

And again, uploading a modified version of a game/movie/music is not the same as uploading parts of a file, that will not function if the file is incomplete.
 
Link is suggesting that the use of the word "copies" in the law means that an entire reproduction must take place for copyright infringement to occur. Therefore, the following would not break this law:
-A portion of any copyrighted work, ex: a recording of a song which is missing the last 10 seconds
-A portion of a file of any copyrighted work, ex: 95% of a file bittorrent

I just wanted to make that clear, because.

WHAT

All portions of a copyrighted work are copyrighted. Otherwise there would be no copyright infringement for things such as sampling music or using a handycam to record movies at the cinema (granted you stop before the credits). Suggesting otherwise is rather silly.

Reproducing a work would include copying it to your own harddrive. Which means, downloading ONLY, you would still be a criminal if you exceed $1000 of total download worth in 3 months. (B)

And uploading any portion would break (C), as you are making copyrighted material available.
 
You can use portions of a media file (audio/video), provided the owner is credited prominently and it doesn't deprive the author in any way.

At least that's what I believe. If you want the 'facts' and 'truth' in 'words': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

When it comes to music samples being protected, it's something like this:
Because paying a royalty fee may be much less expensive than having a potential copyright suit threaten the publication of a completed work in which a publisher has invested significant resources, many authors may seek a license even for uses that copyright law ostensibly permits without liability.
Click to expand...
Going to court can costs a lot of money, even if you are found not guilty. It is probably especially important to license a sample if you plan on making a lot of money using it. Even if the samples may be covered under fair use, the owner of the sample may try legal action.
 
Yeah, most sampling is illegal because the music sampling copyrighted works is then sold, fair use and parody can make it legal. I just meant to say that this proves copyright exists on portions of an entire copyrighted work.
 
illegal because the music sampling copyrighted works is then sold
Click to expand...
My brother made some retail games and to my surprise he said that you can use samples legally. But looking over the fair use thing, it's probably risky for the reasons I mentioned. Getting dragged in to court could be very costly - especially if you lose, but even if you win.

But I really don't want to read a bunch of laws to prove it, I'm not even following this thread. Part of law is interpretation and 'how good is your lawyer'. There are laws that contradict each other, and one argues one thing, and another argues that its protected under a different law.
 
Link said:
50% is not "all but the last second", which is what I was refuting.
I wouldn't test it because various legal systems, UK and USA included have a horrible ability to "interprett" the law in some rather twisted ways, depending on if the court "thinks" what you did was wrong. And no, I can't "prove" that, but that dosen't change it being true.

And again, uploading a modified version of a game/movie/music is not the same as uploading parts of a file, that will not function if the file is incomplete.
Click to expand...

Where in the law does it talk about 90%, or 50%, or 10%? It doesn't talk about any of that, it doesn't have to because all parts of a copyrighted work are copyrighted. I can't take someone's logo and just change the text to my company name. I didn't reproduce the whole thing but I reproduced parts of it which is still illegal.

And it doesn't matter if you are uploading 2kB or 6MB of illegal content because the law that we are quoting doesn't mention lenght (because again it doesn't need to). So your theory that it has to be the entire file for it to be illegal either works or it doesn't work as no numbers are mentioned in the law. And it is clear your theory doesn't work because we all know I can't legally put up a website that shows the first hour of every new movie release or a website with unlimited music downloads with the last second cut off. Actually it's been clear for a few pages of this discussion now that your theory doesn't work, but here we are, still arguing this.
 
Erestheux said:
Link is suggesting that the use of the word "copies" in the law means that an entire reproduction must take place for copyright infringement to occur.
Click to expand...
No I'm not, I suggesting that it must occur before it can be classed as a criminal offense. Please do not paraphrase me inaccurately, that's worse than the "multi quote" method.

No Limit said:
Where in the law does it talk about 90%, or 50%, or 10%? It doesn't talk about any of that, it doesn't have to because all parts of a copyrighted work are copyrighted. I can't take someone's logo and just change the text to my company name. I didn't reproduce the whole thing but I reproduced parts of it which is still illegal.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about the "law" when I said that, I was talking about your comparison to the way bit torrent operates versus cutting the last 1 second of a song being an inaccurate comparison. The point I was making is that saying that it is the exact same thing is not correct.

As I said above, please don't say "you said this" and twist what I said so that it conflicts with whatever point your trying to make.

I am starting to get rather bored of this debate, because we are circling the same points over and over and over, so I propose this. I am going to make a statement, my position if you like. If you can refute it directly, (no mulit-quotes, no paraphrasing) then feel free. But if not, please can we move on?

"Downloading copyright material is a civil issue. It is not a criminal offense. Torrent does not apply, as it is perfectly possible to download without uploading an entire copy of something. Some people may do so, but that then is an argument of distribution and a separate issue, and not something I am looking to defend"
 
Jesus. Yes, we are talking about the "law". You keep ignoring my point. The law does not mention percentages that can be copied. That means it's only illegal if you upload the entire thing (as you suggest) or uploading any parts of it is illegal (as is actually the case). These is no grey area here, you are either right or you are either wrong.

Now if you are right that means I can start up a website and allow people to download any album ever made as long as I leave the last second off the track. Clearly this is insane, so your theory simply doesn't work.

It's a pretty simple point you continue to ignore.
 
Link said:
No I'm not, I suggesting that it must occur before it can be classed as a criminal offense. Please do not paraphrase me inaccurately, that's worse than the "multi quote" method.
Click to expand...

Haha, you obviously read and quoted that out of context and then disregarded the rest of my post. If someone commits copyright infringement even if they only take a portion of a copyrighted work, then they will clearly also commit criminal copyright infringement if they do the same in an illegal manner.

Link said:
"Downloading copyright material is a civil issue. It is not a criminal offense. Torrent does not apply, as it is perfectly possible to download without uploading an entire copy of something. Some people may do so, but that then is an argument of distribution and a separate issue, and not something I am looking to defend"
Click to expand...

Downloading any portion of copyrighted material is illegal copyright infringement if you download (reproduce) more than $1000 in 6 months. Likewise, uploading any portion of any copyrighted work is also illegal.

All parts of a copyrighted work are copyrighted; mentioned in my post you ignored above. It doesn't matter if it's a portion of a file or a modified song excluding its last 10 seconds. You are still committing copyright infringement, and by making it available on a public network, it is illegal. Even if you don't upload an "entire copy" of something (which you should know is not even how Bittorrent works), you are still making portions of copyrighted works available and it is still illegal copyright infringement.
 
Krynn72 said:
Also, I'm not familiar with torrents and p2p software, but I thought that if you were to only partially download something, the file simply wouldn't play?
Click to expand...

Someone reply to this.
 
I think u can preview a vid file with torrent apps krynn
 
Krynn72 said:
Someone reply to this.
Click to expand...

It depends on the parts that you do get. If you get a couple bits in the middle it won't play. But if you get the first few thousand bits of a mp3 file it will play partially until the download is finished.

When you leech on a torrent network you are always uploading parts of the file as you download (in 99% of the cases). When you first upload you start off with the beginning of the file. As you download more and more of it the parts you upload become more sporadic if you are looking at it from a user to user perspective. But in reality you aren't download/uploading from a user to user perspective. You might download the file from hundreds of different of users and you will upload to hundreds of different users at the same time. So eventhough you might be giving one user certain bits and another user certain other bits in the end you end up uploading most (if not all) of the file in the process. Which clearly breaks copyright law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top