Did I read this right? I can now form itunes antugua with all stolen content and sell them for .01 and it would be legal?
-
-
and again you are trying to do an end run around fair use by arguing that if anyone makes money it is an infringement. Well that is absolute not true (hense why the fair use marketplace is a 2.2 trillion dollar marketplace)
in the betamax case universal argued that sony was making money from selling the VCR and therefore it represented a copyright infringement. The court recognized that fact did not mitigate fair use by the consumer so the product (VCRs)
Even unauthorized uses of a copyrighted work are not necessarily infringing. An unlicensed use of the copyright is not an infringement unless it conflicts with one of the specific exclusive rights conferred by the copyright statute. Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken, 422 U.S., at 154 -155. Moreover, the definition of exclusive rights in 106 of the present Act is prefaced by the words "subject to sections 107 through 118." Those sections describe a variety of uses of copyrighted material that "are not infringements of copyright" "notwithstanding the provisions of section 106." The most pertinent in this case is 107, the legislative endorsement of the doctrine of "fair use." 29 [464 U.S. 417, 448]
That section identifies various factors 30 that enable a court to apply an "equitable rule of reason" analysis to particular claims of infringement. 31 Although not conclusive, the first [464 U.S. 417, 449] factor requires that "the commercial or nonprofit character of an activity" be weighed in any fair use decision. 32 If the Betamax were used to make copies for a commercial or profitmaking purpose, such use would presumptively be unfair. The contrary presumption is appropriate here, however, because the District Court's findings plainly establish that time-shifting for private home use must be characterized as a noncommercial, nonprofit activity. Moreover, when one considers the nature of a televised copyrighted audiovisual work, see 17 U.S.C. 107(2) (1982 ed.), and that time-shifting merely enables a viewer to see such a work which he had been invited to witness in its entirety free of charge, the fact [464 U.S. 417, 450] that the entire work is reproduced, see 107(3), does not have its ordinary effect of militating against a finding of fair use. 33
if your arguement was valid the supreme court would have ruled that it did not matter that time shifting was fair use because sony dared to make a profit by selling their VCR (at a cost of approximately 1,000) the actions were automatically illegal. The supreme court ruled in favor of SONY then.
By authorizing sony to make money by providing fair use right of "time shifting" This landmark case is what created most of the 2.2 trillion dollar fair use economy.The sale of copying equipment, like the sale of other articles of commerce, does not constitute contributory infringement if the product is widely used for legitimate, unobjectionable purposes, or, indeed, is merely capable of substantial noninfringing uses. Pp. 434-442.
“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve WozniakComment
-
you might have a problem with using the itunes trademark
but if you sold the work for servers hosted in antugua you would be legal as long as the artist copyrighted their music in US only.
a British artist could still sue you since this was a retaliation against only the US.
“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve WozniakComment
-
this just in...
"Antigua under suspicion of producing nuclear weapons"...
If I know the US, they will figure out a way to fuck antigua into whatever terms they feel like.
I wonder what agency specializes in dealing with shit like this.
-JComment
-
gideongallery.....
I'm not "end running" anything.
I stated the US loses billions to copyright theft, Torrent sites exist to deliver stolen product.
Where is the end run? WTF are we arguing about?Comment
-
torrent sites exist to deliver copyrighted content.
The quoted statistic counts all file trading on p2p as illegal (even fair use) given neilson study that means that the number is inflated by 10 fold (assuming all other trading is statisitically equivalent)does not constitute contributory infringement if the product is widely used for legitimate, unobjectionable purposes, or, indeed, is merely capable of substantial noninfringing uses. Pp. 434-442.
To consider ALL those loses to be real you have to change the laws (making fair use illegal) and KILLING 2.2 trillion dollar economy of business.
There is no way you any sane rational person would consider this fair especially when you consider how easy it would be for the copyright holder to eliminate the infringing activity from the network (see my 15 minute example).
Those that are arguing to destroy fair use are doing so because of their motivated self interest in being able to charge for things they are not legally allowed to charge for now (like re buying the right to view of content already purchased- you should get it from your source arguement).
“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve WozniakComment
-
im having a hard time wrapping my brain around this.
ok, so you can host in antigua and the hosts dont have to comply with dmca notices? and the same with a billing company? and legally a us company cannot collect damages for copywright infringement violations that occured after this happened? anything else?Webmasterchecks Affiliate Payments - fully compatible with nats/mpa3Comment
-
actually i am a partner is a service that does exactly that
the only problem is there is no percentage of fines because by cutting off acess to the offenders they are complying with the safeharbor provision of the DMCA.
right now the service is for software providers (i helped start the company to protect my code) but if you were interested it could be extended to video files
it would cost you about 100/file per month.
“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve WozniakComment
-
pretty much
obviously there are ways to still protect your content, you could film in antiqua so the copyright would exist automatically in that country
you could register your copyright in antiqua spending $1,000s per file to keep yourself protected.(which is how antiqua will make most of its money).
“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve WozniakComment
-
Nice. I think I'll setup a Bit Torrent server there.Comment
Comment