[LawnGnome]

Just a quick question, what about countries where P2P is legal,(canada) because the artist's are paid from a fund, that is fed by extra fee's on media and players.

 

[GlendaleViper]

Uh, you may want to look deeper into the legality of P2P in Canada. Illegal downloads are... illegal here.

 

[LawnGnome]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlendaleViper /img/forum/go_quote.gif Uh, you may want to look deeper into the legality of P2P in Canada. Illegal downloads are... illegal here.

Music downloading has been ruled legal in Canada, and several bills opposing the supreme court's ruling have been shot down.

Largely due to the fact that as I previously said, there is a fun to compensate artist's for music reproduction, and there has been for a few decades now.

The RIAA and CRIA spread their interpretation of the law that it is illegal. However the supreme courts of canada have said in their own interpretations, that downloading is legal.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/in...ing_music.html
http://news.com.com/2100-1025_3-5121479.html
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/itmanagement...9118537,00.htm
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/resc/html...ril182005.html
http://news.com.com/2100-1027_3-5182641.html
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/12...sic_downloads/

Also, the cases brought forth by record companies have all been turned away by the courts, and the so called "violators" information was not allowed to be released by their ISP's, as it violates sections 7 and 8 of our privacy act.

Dont let the propaganda from the south get to you.

Just a note: this is not a defense of P2P.

Just curious of why speak of it is banned, when this is a very international forum, and p2p downloading has been deemed legal in many countries.

 

[Coltrane]

They have the internet in Canada?

How cute.

 

[Febs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LawnGnome /img/forum/go_quote.gif The RIAA and CRIA spread their interpretation of the law that it is illegal. However the supreme courts of canada have said in their own interpretations, that downloading is legal. ... Dont let the propaganda from the south get to you.

Of course, the US courts have reached the opposite conclusion, expressly holding that both uploading and downloading of copyrighted material via p2p is illegal. See the Napster decision.

 

[Lectorcito]

Well, you can't expect this forum to have different rules for each member according to their country of origin.

 

[krmathis]

When did P2P become illegal?
That's like saying cars are illegal, just because they can be used to perform illegal activities.

 

[ozstrike]

You can't expect it to be allowed based on where people are from. As far as I know, the servers are located in the US, where downloading copyrighted music is illegal. Because of where the servers are located, head-fi may get in trouble if there is discussion of copyright infringement.

 

[Duggeh]

Why would a place get into trouble for discussion of a crime topic? As far as I know, thoughtcrime is still restricted to 1984.

Jude and the powers that be may want P2P discussion prohibited for their own reasons, but don't for one minute assume that the server location has a damn thing to do with it. That only applies to the P2P servers themselves.

As for P2P itself being banned, that's also hogwash. There are dozens of companies which use the Bit Torrent protocol for the distribution of material now.

 

[xnothingpoetic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LawnGnome /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just a quick question, what about countries where P2P is legal,(canada) because the artist's are paid from a fund, that is fed by extra fee's on media and players.

First off this place is not other countries.

Head-Fi makes the rules and therefore we have to follow them (or get banned).

Also if they did allow discussion of P2P, i'm sure that would eventually lead to sharing links and what not to where to download the music, and a popular site like this would most likely draw some attention and soon some legal threats could be made.

 

[GlendaleViper]

I have been grossly misinformed. I can't say I agree with the completely open nature of the current state of the law, but looking over the proposed bill that was quashed, I can certainly tell you it's better than what might have been.

 

[Aman]

As far as I know, it is not illegal to TALK ABOUT peer-to-peer sharing of copyrighted material. What I think Jude and others are afraid of is letting Head-Fi become the "middle man" between the user and the dealer, so to speak. I don't at all respect the actions of the RIAA, nor the present government under which I live, but I don't for one moment disrespect the admins of this message board.

Duggeh: Let those who are actually suffering through it all determine if it's really "hell in a hand basket" or not...

We've got enough problems as it is.

 

[ozstrike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duggeh /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why would a place get into trouble for discussion of a crime topic? The USA might be going to hell in a hand basket as far as some of its domestic law is concerned, but as far as I know, thoughtcrime is still restricted to 1984. Jude and the powers that be may want P2P discussion prohibited for their own reasons, but don't for one minute assume that the server location has a damn thing to do with it. That only applies to the P2P servers themselves.

Sorry, I didn't explai myself properly. The fact is, if discussion is allowed, it will probably lead to sharing of links, discussion of tecniques on how to, etc.
Plus, you never know what the RIAA will try next.

I'm going off another forum that I frequent, where discussion of console modification is banned, because the US-based server company were not happy about it.

 

[Duggeh]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aman /img/forum/go_quote.gif Duggeh: Let those who are actually suffering through it all determine if it's really "hell in a hand basket" or not... We've got enough problems as it is.

Comment apologetically withdrawn. I was in a stinking mood last night and a couple of gins loosened my waffling post finger.

 

[Coltrane]

"While discussion of this sort this might seem harmless enough, my goal in posting this is to prevent this site from any unneeded and unwanted attention from anyone who might take an interest in such a discussion who happens to have attorneys on retainer."


I think that is pretty clear that Head-fi is merely afraid of litigation that may result from people discussing this. It is the climate of fear that the RIAA wanted on this issue. The very idea that litigation could even result from talking about the existence of criminal activity is ludicrous. Well played monolithic evil record companies, well played.

And to say that any mention of illegal downloading would lead to people posting links or giving tutorial on how to steal is a bit ridiculous. I posted a thread on how a Tool album had leaked, and that got deleted. How that information could inspire litigation is beyond me.

However, I think head-fi functions better without constant talk of such things. If you want to know about illegal downloading, its very very very easy to find out. I agree with the rule, I just disagree with the reasoning.