Landmark music piracy case
Apr 19, 2009 at 8:39 PM Post #16 of 77
Quote:

Originally Posted by blackcoffee /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Not only a swedish court, but the lowest level of swedish courts. This case would have been appealed regardless of the outcome and moved from the "amateur" court to the next level where only professional judges are making the decisions. There are a number of questionable wordings in the sencence which will be discussed in great lenght before the next step.

(The court "Tingsrätt" which have made this sentence is actually made up of one judge and three or four layman "jurors". Although these jurors are not appointed case by case, instead they are appointed by the political leaders of the regional goverment and have their positions for years. They are still laymen from a legal sense. It is very common to have the decisions changes once appealed to the next level, "Hovrätt").


Well, like I said, I (quite personally, I am not in a position to change the matter) do not like what the decision is fundamentally stating in terms of control of reference and cross-relational databases. It is an...ugly...precedent. Hopefully it will change in the end, but to what I'm not sure
confused_face(1).gif
 
Apr 19, 2009 at 8:43 PM Post #17 of 77
Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake /img/forum/go_quote.gif
True, but please re-read my post and the opinion therein. The American courts can look to international courts for opinions to use during the process; that is, look to others simply to examine what others are thinking and that action can bias the final decision. No legal precedence, but "emotional" and "intellectual" precedence none the less and that is the gist of my post.


Are people coming out with slanted opinions only to support their own beliefs in this matter?

Come on, you are both smart and legally trained. You WELL know that the fashion industry is fighting HARD, tooth and nail, against piracy and counterfeiting using the U.S. Border Patrol and Customs agents. Exactly how many Customs seizures and raids go on in the fashion pirate market, every single day? Fake Gucci seizures? Shops shut down in inner cities by police?

The fight is kept ‘quiet’ relative to RIAA as the action has been taken to the warehouses and loading docks; the fashion industry has the “advantage” of seeking to eliminate counterfeit hard goods while the RIAA and MPAA are trying to control virtual digital files – much harder on a global interweb scale.

Please do not try to use that statement as a leverage point, for under scrutiny you well know as you are incredible educated and intelligent that it will fail a legal test. The fashion industry is currently at war with pirates and counterfeiters, one only need looks at the news and it is there almost every day if one pays attention

fashion counterfeits - Google News


are you a pre-law student? sounds like one
wink.gif
 
Apr 19, 2009 at 8:47 PM Post #18 of 77
Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Judicial activism must be stopped....liberal law professor spewing crap again?...


Oh please. If it weren't for "judicial activism" YOU WOULDN'T BE HERE. From interstate commerce to civil rights to the Constitution itself, America's laws were mostly entire WRITTEN by "activists". Or do people really think that armed rebellion against the legal monarch and army of a country (the Revolutionary War) was undertaken by "conservatives"??
mad.gif


Makes me wonder what exactly people have been learning in United States schools, this...
 
Apr 19, 2009 at 9:20 PM Post #20 of 77
I'm an eager Pirate Bay user, and struggle with no bad guilt.

The reason is easy, I'm not stealing, I'm either borrowing or previewing for an extended period
biggrin.gif
. I'm only glad that I'm not handing out money capitalist swines. Supporting the artists I do gladly, but the 'record industry' is something we're better of without.

Has anybody actually mentioned what the swedes were sentenced for?
not for illegal activities, but for making it possible for other to do illegal actions. Google does the same.

Fingers crossed for the appeal.
 
Apr 19, 2009 at 9:27 PM Post #21 of 77
I believe in paying for good music.

I have even gone to buying the 24/96 masters online if they are availible.
Most of the music you can get online is done in a med/low bitrate MP3 which is quite frankly, not worth the hard drive space.

I don't support the practices of the RIAA. The mere fact they they have sued DEAD people or elderly who don't even own computers speaks for itself.

Now, they are pressuring places like universities to do the work of tracking students.
My sophmore year of college, they turned off my internet for 4 days (it was friday til monday because fo a weekend). I didn't do anything illegal, but they actually turned off my internet because of the amount of bandwidth I was using. At the time, I was doing some web hosting for members of my immediate family while comcast was repairing the cable line for their neighborhood. Then add my own web browing and watching shows on sites similar to Hulu, and downloading Lossless tracks or CD from places like HDtracks.

Nothing illegal. In proving my innocence, I found out from NUIT that the RIAA had made threats and was pressuring the university to shut down anyone and report anyone who was using more than 40-50GB a month in bandwidth. That, IMO, was beyond ridiculous and made me doing my programming homework assignments a royal PIA as university computers do not have the correct software in many cases. Afterward, I got to be on a "special" list of high bandwidth users. I notice that afterward, the university system was doing far more checks on what was going on with my internet (I use a program that shows whenever some one is trying to access my computer and what their IP address is *a feature of peerguardian*). This slows down my internet connection for about 30 seconds and it comes by about every few hours.

The point being that the RIAA is being a BULLY in many cases. I support artists and I do pay for music.


As far as artists actually being paid for their work, the big music labels have a long way to go IMO. One of y best friends in highschool, her father was a member of a semi-popular band in the late 70's. Well, the recording company started selling the album and song on iTunes and it was featured on a popular show about 4 years ago. The sales of this song on iTunes went wayy up.

The record company would not give any of the members of the band any of the royalties because it didn't in their mind represent " The sale of single albums or full albums" as it was a digital download than the purchase of a palpable item. This recording company has very expensive lawyers and my friend's dad was now just a normal middle class superviser. He didn't have the money to even try to get the royalties and the cost of suing the record company would be almost equivalent to the royalty money if they won at all.


When the RIAA starts following the letter of the law itself instead of "guilty until proven innocent" and the record companies do right by paying the artists by which they make their success, I WILL SUPPORT THE RIAA.

Until such time, it is morally wrong for me to support either side.
 
Apr 19, 2009 at 9:37 PM Post #23 of 77
Is it fair to obsolete formats to make the consumer pay full fare for each new format of the same material? Yes it is our choice to keep the older format but have you seen a VHS tape in the store?

The issue of intellectual protection is real and should be protected. The problem is that the artist isn't the protected, it's the recording industry. If they can change format forever, they can sustain profits of the same material forever. At what point does my purchase become mine for personal use as I choose?

Shareware should not be allowed since the purpose is to allow intellectual content transfer. Why is the shareware software not shut down? Instead, the recording industry is making it personal by going after the consumer.
 
Apr 19, 2009 at 9:42 PM Post #24 of 77
Quote:

Originally Posted by SweetAdeline /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Whatever happened to the oink guys?


A friend once asked me, "What is CD". I like waffles.
rolleyes.gif
 
Apr 19, 2009 at 9:42 PM Post #25 of 77
Quote:

Originally Posted by -=Germania=- /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I believe in paying for good music.

When the RIAA starts following the letter of the law itself instead of "guilty until proven innocent" and the record companies do right by paying the artists by which they make their success, I WILL SUPPORT THE RIAA.

Until such time, it is morally wrong for me to support either side.


I agree that going after people for downloading is going too far. Like I said, as long as its available, people will pirate music.

Which is why this case is different, they are actually arresting/fining the hosts of the site, and not the users. This is what I like seeing.
 
Apr 19, 2009 at 9:50 PM Post #27 of 77
I used to pirate a lot of music and video games even but I made a conscious decision to stop because piracy really is killing PC gaming and that sucks for me, but I find the best music I have been discovering is no where near the RIAA, so screw them. Is piracy wrong? Of course, but the RIAA cannot claim the moral high ground in any sense of the word. I buy all of my cd's, but I have downloaded a few albums that are either out of print, or I have on vinyl and there is no new "remaster". All of the music I have in digital form I own a physical copy of, but I am one of the few that do this I'm sure.

This case does get a little complicated because I don't know how much Pirate Bay actually encourages users to upload torrents that point to copywritten material. The argue about google is valid because I can look for open directories full of mp3's using google so you can say google is helping me pirate these materials.
 
Apr 19, 2009 at 9:55 PM Post #28 of 77
Quote:

Originally Posted by Eisenhower /img/forum/go_quote.gif
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/18/wo...pe/18copy.html

The Pirate Bay owners have been sentenced jail time.

I was wondering what some of you think about the whole music piracy thing.


I'm a college kid, so I feel quite alone in supporting the RIAA (which I do) in these matters. I think anyone who appreciates and respects the art and science of recorded music should chide those who make excuses for this guiltless form of theft.

I can't say I'm innocent in this matter. It's just way to easy to download music. Like, absurdly easy, as most of you are aware of. I can download any artist's entire discography in minutes. It's insane, and they need to do something about it.


???

You support the RIAA and yet you admit to pirating music. That seems hypocritical to me. Many artists do not support the RIAA because the RIAA represents the recording publishers who have been ripping off the artists for decades. And an mp3 is not a duplicate of a cd because it is a lossy format so no one is stealing a copy of the original. That's like saying I stole the Mona Lisa because I found a cheap print of the Mona Lisa in a dumpster. The fact they think people should pay the same for an mp3 as a cd is proof enough that it is the RIAA who are the real crooks.
 
Apr 19, 2009 at 9:56 PM Post #29 of 77
Snake, you are right that you can argue other cases in your brief, but that isn't always a good idea. You have to be careful that that laws argued are similar and, further, do that while not being able to claim it as controlling or even persuasive law. You're better off arguing US law, of which there is some on this topic. That is personal preference, though. My philosophical stance is to keep it brief and to the point. I don't like to twist international stuff in because that seems like grasping. That's just me, though.

About the fashion industry, yes, I support them in pursuing counterfeits and fakes. That is clearly wrong. On the other hand, it is legal to buy a Brooks Brothers suit, take it apart, copy the exact patterns, then have a Chinese factory crank out identical suits from the same material. They can be stitch-for-stitch identical, and as long as I don't put a fake Brooks Brothers label on them, they are 100% legal.

Since it is legal to make absolutely identical designs under your own label, how come that hasn't killed the industry?

A big part of that is status. People pay for the label or logo. Price and exclusivity are big sellers. Seems to happen in the audio industry, as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top