Download Case Rules In Favor of Music Companies

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • BFT3K
    Too lazy to set a custom title
    • Dec 2005
    • 10764

    #1

    Download Case Rules In Favor of Music Companies

    Copyright laws were broken. Punishment follows...

    http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/US/...ory?id=8219984
  • BFT3K
    Too lazy to set a custom title
    • Dec 2005
    • 10764

    #2
    Nothing?

    Comment

    • Fletch XXX
      GFY HALL OF FAME DAMMIT!!!
      • Jan 2002
      • 60840

      #3
      no one cares, they too busy copying netflix DVDs and downloading the Nirvana discog!

      Want an Android App for your tube, membership, or free site?

      Need banners or promo material? Hit us up (ICQ Fletch: 148841377) or email me fletchxxx at gmail.com - recent work - About me

      Comment

      • seeandsee
        Check SIG!
        • Mar 2006
        • 50945

        #4
        jesus no power :D
        BUY MY SIG - 50$/Year

        Contact here

        Comment

        • HighEnergy
          So Fucking Banned
          • Apr 2007
          • 806

          #5
          Originally posted by Fletch XXX
          no one cares, they too busy copying netflix DVDs and downloading the Nirvana discog!
          Winning a handful of small lawsuits is an excellent starting point (foundation) to bolster future litigation efforts. I guess it's more fun to whine and bitch than actually embrace the problem at hand.

          Comment

          • jim911
            Registered User
            • Jul 2009
            • 41

            #6
            I don't see a problem as long as i'm not changing it and calling it my own AND making $ from it I would have to agree if it's on the radio for the public to freely record whats the difference
            Manda Adult Directory Submit your site Free
            Cool Sex Toys and DvDs

            Comment

            • Paul Markham
              Too old to care
              • Jun 2001
              • 52942

              #7
              All good news.



              Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
              PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

              Comment

              • CrkMStanz
                Confirmed User
                • Jan 2008
                • 517

                #8
                Originally posted by jim911
                I don't see a problem as long as i'm not changing it and calling it my own AND making $ from it I would have to agree if it's on the radio for the public to freely record whats the difference
                its all about antiquated laws and quality

                tape it off of a radio, you get a very inferior product (no one cares)
                video your TV screen - very inferior copy (no one cares)
                use a VCR - inferior copy that degrades over time (most people don't care)

                until now law considered that copies were inferior/degradeable. until now law considered that if you wanted to use VCR technology to send out a million copies of the newest movie to you global 'friends' you had to buy a shitload of VCR's, pay for space and electricity, and buy a million blank tapes, pay for shipping... - all to produce inferior degradeable copies.

                these are the laws that our friend gideon bases his arguments on.

                then came the internet

                now billions of exact copies of any digital media can be made - perfect and no degredation over time, and perfect when a copy is made from a copy - at (virtually) no cost to the individuals.

                it is time that the law considers the new technologies, and the ramifications that are entirely different from those that were true in the time of gideons best friend - the VCR.

                it is time

                you want a perfect copy of something digital? well the news is - 'that' is someones product and property - PAY FOR IT at least once, if you want it in your life. Just because you heard something on the radio should not give you license to get a perfect personal copy for free.
                believe me - without free porn, just as many people will seek porn out on the Internet, and many more will pay if there is no free alternative, its not like sex is a fad - it can be milked much like any renewable resource - long term

                i wasn't born with enough middle fingers - Marilyn Manson

                Comment

                • gideongallery
                  Confirmed User
                  • Aug 2003
                  • 7082

                  #9
                  Originally posted by CrkMStanz
                  its all about antiquated laws and quality

                  tape it off of a radio, you get a very inferior product (no one cares)
                  video your TV screen - very inferior copy (no one cares)
                  use a VCR - inferior copy that degrades over time (most people don't care)

                  until now law considered that copies were inferior/degradeable. until now law considered that if you wanted to use VCR technology to send out a million copies of the newest movie to you global 'friends' you had to buy a shitload of VCR's, pay for space and electricity, and buy a million blank tapes, pay for shipping... - all to produce inferior degradeable copies.

                  these are the laws that our friend gideon bases his arguments on.

                  then came the internet

                  now billions of exact copies of any digital media can be made - perfect and no degredation over time, and perfect when a copy is made from a copy - at (virtually) no cost to the individuals.

                  it is time that the law considers the new technologies, and the ramifications that are entirely different from those that were true in the time of gideons best friend - the VCR.

                  it is time

                  you want a perfect copy of something digital? well the news is - 'that' is someones product and property - PAY FOR IT at least once, if you want it in your life. Just because you heard something on the radio should not give you license to get a perfect personal copy for free.
                  if you don't want people to have personal perfect copies then don't licience it to streams that would allow digital copies to be made. (SIRUS, etc)

                  you can't have it both ways.

                  BTW everything i am talking about is pay for it at least once (either direct, by subcription, or via piracy tax).

                  “When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

                  Comment

                  • gideongallery
                    Confirmed User
                    • Aug 2003
                    • 7082

                    #10
                    http://recordingindustryvspeople.blo...een-dealt.html

                    list of all the mistakes in the decision

                    looks like your going to have a long appeal in this one too.

                    “When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

                    Comment

                    • Redmanthatcould
                      Confirmed User
                      • Dec 2006
                      • 2771

                      #11
                      Hopefully the appeal does not go through, and it sticks. It would be great if there was a precedent like this at the Federal level.

                      Comment

                      • kane
                        Too lazy to set a custom title
                        • Aug 2001
                        • 20684

                        #12
                        The guy admitted he did it, said on the stand that he has done this sort of thing for a long time and then got caught and punished. Good. That is how it supposed to work. I'm not sure how they came up with the amount, but the amount doesn't really matter. He has said he will declare bankruptcy so the people who had their stuff illegally downloaded and the RIAA will never see a dime.

                        Hopefully though this will help send a message that if you get caught it could bankrupt you and helps to stop some people from doing this.

                        All that said I think the RIAA is using these cases as a way to set case law precedent and slowly work their way towards the sites and services that people use to illegally download.

                        Comment

                        • baddog
                          So Fucking Banned
                          • Apr 2001
                          • 107089

                          #13
                          Originally posted by gideongallery
                          if you don't want people to have personal perfect copies then don't licience it to streams that would allow digital copies to be made. (SIRUS, etc)

                          you can't have it both ways.

                          BTW everything i am talking about is pay for it at least once (either direct, by subcription, or via piracy tax).
                          In other words, don't leave your door unlocked unless you expect to be robbed.

                          Comment

                          • baddog
                            So Fucking Banned
                            • Apr 2001
                            • 107089

                            #14
                            Originally posted by kane
                            All that said I think the RIAA is using these cases as a way to set case law precedent . . . .
                            The only way that could happen is if they lost at the lower court level then won at the Appellate level.*




                            *Maybe. That was in Federal court and they do things a lot differently, but I would imagine that part still holds true. I doubt every Federal case heard was citable.
                            Last edited by baddog; 07-31-2009, 04:23 PM.

                            Comment

                            • baddog
                              So Fucking Banned
                              • Apr 2001
                              • 107089

                              #15
                              Originally posted by gideongallery
                              http://recordingindustryvspeople.blo...een-dealt.html

                              list of all the mistakes in the decision

                              looks like your going to have a long appeal in this one too.
                              I decided to look at your blog, but pretty much had to stop after:

                              1. If the plaintiffs wish to prove distribution, they should have to prove:
                              (a) dissemination of copies
                              (b) to the public

                              Since the defendant already admitted it on the stand.

                              Comment

                              • kane
                                Too lazy to set a custom title
                                • Aug 2001
                                • 20684

                                #16
                                Originally posted by baddog
                                The only way that could happen is if they lost at the lower court level then won at the Appellate level.*




                                *Maybe. That was in Federal court and they do things a lot differently, but I would imagine that part still holds true. I doubt every Federal case heard was citable.
                                True. I just feel like the RIAA realizes now that suing individuals doesn't work. They have won over 30,000 cases and yet downloading is still more prevalent then ever before. I have a feeling they are now picking their fights in order to set some precedence. But like you say it will depend on what court the fights take place in and what outcome happens at what level.

                                Comment

                                • baddog
                                  So Fucking Banned
                                  • Apr 2001
                                  • 107089

                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by kane
                                  True. I just feel like the RIAA realizes now that suing individuals doesn't work. They have won over 30,000 cases and yet downloading is still more prevalent then ever before. I have a feeling they are now picking their fights in order to set some precedence. But like you say it will depend on what court the fights take place in and what outcome happens at what level.
                                  And if it is published. Unfortunately, not all Appellate decisions are published, and if not published, not a reliance.

                                  Comment

                                  • kane
                                    Too lazy to set a custom title
                                    • Aug 2001
                                    • 20684

                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by baddog
                                    And if it is published. Unfortunately, not all Appellate decisions are published, and if not published, not a reliance.
                                    Very true. The legal system is so full of rules/regulation it is like navigating a mine field.

                                    Comment

                                    • gideongallery
                                      Confirmed User
                                      • Aug 2003
                                      • 7082

                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by baddog
                                      I decided to look at your blog, but pretty much had to stop after:

                                      1. If the plaintiffs wish to prove distribution, they should have to prove:
                                      (a) dissemination of copies
                                      (b) to the public

                                      Since the defendant already admitted it on the stand.
                                      he admitted downloading
                                      he has no way of knowing how many people accessed the copies on his machine

                                      big difference
                                      they convicted him on distribution without any proof that any were distributed because he admitted downloading.

                                      “When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

                                      Comment

                                      • baddog
                                        So Fucking Banned
                                        • Apr 2001
                                        • 107089

                                        #20
                                        Originally posted by gideongallery
                                        he admitted downloading
                                        he has no way of knowing how many people accessed the copies on his machine

                                        big difference
                                        they convicted him on distribution without any proof that any were distributed because he admitted downloading.
                                        Sharing = distribution

                                        His appeal [should it happen] has nothing to do with whether or not he was distributing.

                                        Comment

                                        • CrkMStanz
                                          Confirmed User
                                          • Jan 2008
                                          • 517

                                          #21
                                          Originally posted by baddog
                                          Sharing = distribution

                                          His appeal [should it happen] has nothing to do with whether or not he was distributing.
                                          don't get sucked in baddog - gideon has a convenient logic that defies all argument - you will find your sanity slipping away soon if you continue....

                                          I reccommend that you find a brick wall near you and yell at it - it will be much more productive.
                                          believe me - without free porn, just as many people will seek porn out on the Internet, and many more will pay if there is no free alternative, its not like sex is a fad - it can be milked much like any renewable resource - long term

                                          i wasn't born with enough middle fingers - Marilyn Manson

                                          Comment

                                          • baddog
                                            So Fucking Banned
                                            • Apr 2001
                                            • 107089

                                            #22
                                            Originally posted by CrkMStanz
                                            don't get sucked in baddog - gideon has a convenient logic that defies all argument - you will find your sanity slipping away soon if you continue....

                                            I reccommend that you find a brick wall near you and yell at it - it will be much more productive.
                                            I am bored. Waiting for 15 minutes to take the dog on a run.

                                            He comes up with some interesting concepts. So fun to play with.

                                            Comment

                                            • CrkMStanz
                                              Confirmed User
                                              • Jan 2008
                                              • 517

                                              #23
                                              Originally posted by baddog
                                              I am bored. Waiting for 15 minutes to take the dog on a run.

                                              He comes up with some interesting concepts. So fun to play with.
                                              carry on then
                                              believe me - without free porn, just as many people will seek porn out on the Internet, and many more will pay if there is no free alternative, its not like sex is a fad - it can be milked much like any renewable resource - long term

                                              i wasn't born with enough middle fingers - Marilyn Manson

                                              Comment

                                              • baddog
                                                So Fucking Banned
                                                • Apr 2001
                                                • 107089

                                                #24
                                                Originally posted by CrkMStanz
                                                carry on then
                                                Well, Buddy is looking at me like it is time for me to put some shoes on and we go expend some energy.

                                                Maybe later.

                                                Comment

                                                • Paul Markham
                                                  Too old to care
                                                  • Jun 2001
                                                  • 52942

                                                  #25
                                                  Seems the judge has set the fine at $675,000.

                                                  Jurors ordered Tenenbaum to pay $22,500 for each incident of copyright infringement, effectively finding that his actions were willful. The attorney for the 25-year-old student had asked the jury earlier Friday to "send a message" to the music industry by awarding only minimal damages.
                                                  Nice message the attorney wanted to send, does he use this argument in all cases?



                                                  Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
                                                  PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

                                                  Comment

                                                  • baddog
                                                    So Fucking Banned
                                                    • Apr 2001
                                                    • 107089

                                                    #26
                                                    Originally posted by Paul Markham
                                                    Seems the judge has set the fine at $675,000.



                                                    Nice message the attorney wanted to send, does he use this argument in all cases?
                                                    I have to admit, I was a little confused as to what the message was supposed to be.

                                                    Comment

                                                    • gideongallery
                                                      Confirmed User
                                                      • Aug 2003
                                                      • 7082

                                                      #27
                                                      Originally posted by baddog
                                                      Sharing = distribution

                                                      His appeal [should it happen] has nothing to do with whether or not he was distributing.
                                                      that make available arguement again

                                                      if you share and no one connects to you is it distribution
                                                      NO

                                                      sharing != distribution

                                                      sharing + proof someone downloaded from you = distribution



                                                      that the point of the arguement you stopped read from because you don't agree with
                                                      Last edited by gideongallery; 08-01-2009, 06:18 AM.

                                                      “When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

                                                      Comment

                                                      • Pleasurepays
                                                        BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES
                                                        • Aug 2002
                                                        • 11913

                                                        #28
                                                        Originally posted by gideongallery
                                                        that make available arguement again

                                                        if you share and no one connects to you is it distribution
                                                        NO

                                                        sharing != distribution

                                                        sharing + proof someone downloaded from you = distribution



                                                        that the point of the arguement you stopped read from because you don't agree with
                                                        he admitted to doing it. that in itself, is proof you fucking idiot.

                                                        Comment

                                                        • gideongallery
                                                          Confirmed User
                                                          • Aug 2003
                                                          • 7082

                                                          #29
                                                          Originally posted by Pleasurepays
                                                          he admitted to doing it. that in itself, is proof you fucking idiot.
                                                          he admitted sharing

                                                          he did not admit distributing

                                                          the two are not equal.

                                                          since distribution is the act that is actionable only a moron would claim it was proof of a crime.

                                                          “When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

                                                          Comment

                                                          • Pleasurepays
                                                            BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES
                                                            • Aug 2002
                                                            • 11913

                                                            #30
                                                            Originally posted by gideongallery
                                                            he admitted sharing

                                                            he did not admit distributing

                                                            the two are not equal.

                                                            since distribution is the act that is actionable only a moron would claim it was proof of a crime.
                                                            from the article:

                                                            "Joel Tenenbaum, of Providence, R.I., admitted in court that he downloaded and distributed 30 songs."

                                                            Jesus christ, I didn't really realize how sick in the fucking head you are. You ignore everything that doesn't agree with your absurd views anytime anyone says anything... and you respond with long winded, point by point diatribes that ignore the point completely.

                                                            FUCK OFF ... you are not even in this industry to begin with.

                                                            Comment

                                                            • Pleasurepays
                                                              BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES
                                                              • Aug 2002
                                                              • 11913

                                                              #31
                                                              anyway... i have no intention of debating the obvious with you or engaging you in your delusional state of mind.

                                                              your bullshit is getting old though for sure.

                                                              Comment

                                                              • gideongallery
                                                                Confirmed User
                                                                • Aug 2003
                                                                • 7082

                                                                #32
                                                                Originally posted by Pleasurepays
                                                                from the article:

                                                                "Joel Tenenbaum, of Providence, R.I., admitted in court that he downloaded and distributed 30 songs."

                                                                Jesus christ, I didn't really realize how sick in the fucking head you are. You ignore everything that doesn't agree with your absurd views anytime anyone says anything... and you respond with long winded, point by point diatribes that ignore the point completely.

                                                                FUCK OFF ... you are not even in this industry to begin with.
                                                                ah i see so an interpretation or summary of an actual statement should supercede the actual statement.

                                                                so if you admit that you were driving a car
                                                                and you admit you didn't check the speedometer

                                                                that if a rephase that you admitted you were driving and speeding that should be enough to convict you of a crime of speeding even though that not actually what you admitted too.

                                                                look at the actual questions and what he actually admitted to.

                                                                “When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

                                                                Comment

                                                                • gideongallery
                                                                  Confirmed User
                                                                  • Aug 2003
                                                                  • 7082

                                                                  #33
                                                                  Originally posted by Pleasurepays
                                                                  from the article:

                                                                  "Joel Tenenbaum, of Providence, R.I., admitted in court that he downloaded and distributed 30 songs."

                                                                  Jesus christ, I didn't really realize how sick in the fucking head you are. You ignore everything that doesn't agree with your absurd views anytime anyone says anything... and you respond with long winded, point by point diatribes that ignore the point completely.

                                                                  FUCK OFF ... you are not even in this industry to begin with.
                                                                  as for the 30 songs in question, they were only proven to be given to a company (media sentry) who by the very nature of them being hired to investigate was authorized to recieve them.

                                                                  Giving files to someone who is authorized to recieve them has never been explictly ruled to be a crime. And has enough of a bases of entrapment (especially in a case where the infringement is always initiated by the downloader) that it should not be considered.

                                                                  I believe that this is another one of those knock down bogus precedents of the past cases, not a guy actually trying to get off on a crime.

                                                                  the order of arguements makes me suspect that.

                                                                  “When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

                                                                  Comment

                                                                  • DWB
                                                                    Registered User
                                                                    • Jul 2003
                                                                    • 31779

                                                                    #34
                                                                    Good!!! Any positive news is great news!

                                                                    Comment

                                                                    • baddog
                                                                      So Fucking Banned
                                                                      • Apr 2001
                                                                      • 107089

                                                                      #35
                                                                      Originally posted by gideongallery
                                                                      he admitted sharing

                                                                      he did not admit distributing

                                                                      the two are not equal.

                                                                      since distribution is the act that is actionable only a moron would claim it was proof of a crime.
                                                                      Then why are they not whining about that decision? They are talking about an appeal based on the fact that he was not allowed to argue fair use.

                                                                      No one [other than you] is arguing the distribution issue.

                                                                      Comment

                                                                      • gideongallery
                                                                        Confirmed User
                                                                        • Aug 2003
                                                                        • 7082

                                                                        #36
                                                                        Originally posted by baddog
                                                                        Then why are they not whining about that decision? They are talking about an appeal based on the fact that he was not allowed to argue fair use.

                                                                        No one [other than you] is arguing the distribution issue.
                                                                        do you not understand that fair use is connected to the illegal vs legal distribution.

                                                                        if the person who is downloading from his sharing (initiated by the downloader) has a fair use right to the content. There is no illegal distribution. It would be just as legal as if copyright holder and explictly said it was ok to get it from him.

                                                                        for two reasons
                                                                        1. it beyond his control (initiated by the user)
                                                                        2. the act is covered by fair use and therefore outside the scope of the exclusive rights of the copyright holder.



                                                                        claiming the he admitted he was guilty simple because he acknowledged that he shared the file, and that media sentry downloaded 30 songs from his folders (initiated by media sentry)

                                                                        “When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

                                                                        Comment

                                                                        Working...