Quote:
Originally Posted by kane
1. It wasn't the supreme court that ruled in the Cablevision case, at least not according to the article you linked in this thread it was 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. According to this story the Supreme Court refused to hear the case.
2. The way I read and understand the case here is why it was a success for Cablevision. When you push the record button on your remote the system makes a single copy of the program you want to record. They saw that as being no different that a person pressing the record button on a VCR. That the storage device was in a remote location made no difference. The reason for this is that there was no human interaction needed in the process. You press record, the system records your show. When you go to watch it it plays back that same show. It is just you and technology and not other humans are involved.
With the bit torrent swarm that is not the case. Many humans have to be involved. For you to back up your favorite show/movie or whatever to the swarm the other users have to, at the very least, seek out a torrent file, download that file, open that file with their bit torrent client and possibly then tell their client where to store the downloaded data. So there is much human interaction needed. Your backup cannot exist without the interaction of others.
3. These others are getting copies of the show/movie from your recorded copy, not their own. The case itself says if 1000 people record the same show the system makes 1000 copies of that show. If they all play them back at the same time it is then 1000 private viewings. If you are seeding a show and sharing it with the swarm you could end up with 1000's of people all getting copies of a show that they themselves did not record. They are all watching the same person's copy which could be looked upon as a public viewing. |
That's a pretty good summary, + user cannot "record" a show from the past, he'll have to wait for the rerun + if user hit record half way through a show user will record only half the show.
Now that this is said again we will start over blaming the structure of tcp/ip, then caching. dvd-rippers, then some betamax cassettes etc etc etc
We can also get into some arguments the data is PUT INTO the cloud by the user or the data is FETCHED by the cloud by the cloud (ie the cloud download it), in theory it could be a good argument however since a user will be capable of exiting the cloud, when he exited the cloud he is just "an individual", at this point the cloud provided a copy of it's data. If the cloud is just a cloud without an owner (will the cloud remain if the original seeder exit? ) it's a conspiracy case if the cloud vanishes when the "owner" exit I'd look more into the law of agency as the cloud would be an agent acting on behalf of the seeder
And just for the reference Cablevision is not doing a public transmission on the public internet, cablevision is doing a private transmission (user is authenticated through his playback device) on a public network (the internet)
In reality we are going through the same arguments over an dover again and I have yet to see anything that could make the technology guilty of a crime and I doubt it's going to change in this thread.
