Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery
so it doesn't make sense when you deliberately violate the US supreme court ruling in Cablevision vs 20th century fox and look at it using the wrong POV.
it only sharing if you look at from the network prespective. The problem is that every fair use even timeshifting appears to be an infringement when you look at it from that point of view. The appeals court recognized this and when they changed the POV they realized it was no different using the cloud as a timeshifting device as a VCR.
That the issue here, the seeder is never sharing the file, when you look at it from the users POV. He is never giving ANYONE a copy of the working file, he is simply putting pieces of the file on multiple transient computers (fair use of cacheing). The leacher is not making copies when they download the pieces, because it still not a full working copy. It only when they REORDER it into a working copy does the action ever become an infringing, and then only when you don't have a fair use right to RECOVER the content.
I will say it again
leave the seeder alone
leave the tracker alone
leave the leecher with the fair use alone
Go after the leecher without the fair use right
|
btw if you want proof of this try playing a torrent that is only 20% complete and see how quickly it crashes your windows media player.
it doesn't become a complete working copy until the entire transaction is done, and the seeder has zero control about those actions after they handed out the pieces to each individual person.