homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam

The Geek Culture Forums!


  New Poll  
my profile | directory login | | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Geek Culture Forums!   » The Archives   » The Big Archives   » file shareing is may soon be a felony

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: file shareing is may soon be a felony
unclefungus
Highlie
Member # 2118

Member Rated:
4
Icon 13 posted July 17, 2003 15:46      Profile for unclefungus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This article: http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,59654,00.html describes a bill to make ANY file sharing via P2P anything an aoutmatic felony, punishable by a fine that is equal to my SGLI, or time in prison equal to the length of my military contract! I don't think the bill though of non-P2P networks, but what that?

<sarcasm>
It's a good thing those artists are going to be well fed! I hope the ones I don't like do real good too. God only knows what to do with the hungry kids in 3rd world country's, so we dont have to worry! Lets gorge our selves on good music!<\sarcasm>

really thogh we may have to revert to useing a CD player and a patch cable to record waves, then convert/save as (OS dependant) MP3/Ogg/What have ye. Then we could just bring peoples computers in and move thier harddrive to another one and copy files! Or use a bunch of CD's! now thats file sharing!

--------------------
Professional software should not have dancing paperclips.

Posts: 613 | From: changes, right now it's Jacksonville or Fayetteville | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Oz, the Wizard of
Highlie
Member # 1454

Member Rated:
5
Icon 13 posted July 17, 2003 15:58      Profile for Oz, the Wizard of   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This is why I never use my real personal information on the internet... [Wink]

-Oz

--------------------
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!

Posts: 707 | From: The Emerald City | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
californiarockr
Assimilated
Member # 1986

Member Rated:
3
Icon 1 posted July 17, 2003 16:13      Profile for californiarockr     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
hey, all my music is paid for. not by me of course, but my friends have all the CDs id ever want to rip anyways

--------------------
lol

Posts: 361 | From: guess... :/ | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cap'n Vic

Member # 1477

Icon 1 posted July 17, 2003 16:20      Profile for Cap'n Vic     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Oz, the Wizard of:
This is why I never use my real personal information on the internet... [Wink]

-Oz

They already know who you are Oz.
Posts: 5471 | From: One of the drones from sector 7G | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
dragonman97

SuperFan!
Member # 780

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 17, 2003 16:28      Profile for dragonman97   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Ahem, you mean you don't give them your IP addr & MAC addr?

--------------------
There are three things you can be sure of in life: Death, taxes, and reading about fake illnesses online...

Posts: 9345 | From: Westchester County, New York | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
TonyRad
Assimilated
Member # 1448

Icon 1 posted July 17, 2003 21:03      Profile for TonyRad         Edit/Delete Post 
I think its lame.... I'm going to go buy some cd's now, because I downloaded the songs first. If I would not have downloaded, I would not want to buy the cd's.. So tell me, how does that hurt them..

Tony Rad

PS That was not sarcasm, that was seriousness.

Posts: 371 | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
G-3PO
Geek
Member # 1851

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 17, 2003 21:14      Profile for G-3PO     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
well...not to break the revolutionary atmosphere or anything, but they DO have legal and moral rights to charge your for their music..they put time and money into creating it, and well...you see where Im going. Hopefully.

--------------------
For large values of one, one equals two, for small values of two.

Posts: 187 | From: Augusta, GA | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
unclefungus
Highlie
Member # 2118

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 17, 2003 21:25      Profile for unclefungus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
G-3PO, making some money on the side from a talent that you have is one thing. Expecing to live off that talent (more so, the lack there of than not)and make millions of dollars extra is not something that I would take seriously. If they dont have some income to fall back on it's thier own fault, they screwed them selves and I feel no pity. The same thing goes for Sports players, and writers. Getting a real job never hurt any body.
Posts: 613 | From: changes, right now it's Jacksonville or Fayetteville | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
unclefungus
Highlie
Member # 2118

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 17, 2003 21:27      Profile for unclefungus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
....that is something i'd NOT take seriously....
sorry

Posts: 613 | From: changes, right now it's Jacksonville or Fayetteville | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Coffee_geek
Assimilated
Member # 1608

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted July 18, 2003 10:12      Profile for Coffee_geek   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Wait... if people aren't making money off of thier talents, then they are only making money doing things that they have no aptitude for. What about talented computer programmers? Isn't that real work? A 'real job' is merely getting paid for providing a service. As long as people will pay for that service (even if it's something silly, like running around in tights with an inflated pigskin) then who is anyone to say what is and is not a 'real job'? You can't say that musicians aren't producing anything useful without also saying that computer game companies aren't producing anything useful. Music piracy is just as bad as software piracy.

Mind, I do both. CD's are outrageously expensive, and most bands are disgustingly wealthy as it is. But at least I don't pretend that it isn't theft.

On an unrelated note, I think that making use of peer to peer services a felony is rediculous. What about e-mail? It's the same concept. Sending information from one person to another. That goes for the whole internet, actually.

(from the article) "[the bill] criminalizes the placement of any copyright work on a computer network."
What a stupid concept! Bigsnap.com has some copyrighted Billy Collins poetry. It's all attributed to him, and contains the proper copyright information. But that's copyrighted work on a publically avaliable computer network! TO JAIL WITH THEM!

Information, in this age of ours, is like a vapour. And almost everything exists as information. The only way to ever completely prevent theft of copyrighted material would be to switch to a police state. And even then, we'd need a pretty extensive thought police to keep everyone in line. As I said before, I acknowledge that copying music is theft. But the good people of the recording industry need to realize that there isn't a damn thing they can do to stop it.

Seeming and Dreaming,
Coffee

--------------------
We got, ten minutes to get there
We got, ten minutes to go
Throw this one in for the money
Cause the next one's for the next show

Posts: 464 | From: Varies | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stereo

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 748

Member Rated:
5
Icon 13 posted July 18, 2003 11:37      Profile for Stereo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
If your quote is directly, it can be even worst, Coffee_geek. Take for example:

We develop in-house courses. The courses' content will be copyrighted, of course. But if we decide to make some available to the population at large, that would be a felony under such a bill. It will be our content, we will own the copyright (OK, actually, the Queen will, but that's not the point), but that would be copyrighted content on a computer network. Actually, any courses on our intranet would be too.

And what about an author displaying his work for review?

The bill's makers will have a long, long, long list of exceptions to write in order to give it some credibility.

(Very loosely related question: isn't there some timeframe after which copyrighted content goes to public domain? Like 50 years after the death of the author, or something? I still don't understand how Bill G. could buy the "digital rights" of the Mona Lisa. Or was that cancelled and I missed it? Anyways, I think that a lot of silly things go on in the name of copyrights and free speech. No matter how good is the original idea, abuse is always a bad thing.)

Posts: 2289 | From: Gatineau, Quebec, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
ph34r teh fluf1bun1
Geek
Member # 2245

Member Rated:
5
Icon 5 posted July 18, 2003 11:52      Profile for ph34r teh fluf1bun1     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I think it's something like 70 years after the death of the eh "maker" that the eh "stuff" goes into the public domain.

I ought to know that! *Bad Bun1*

But than it very likely isn't the same laws in both our countries??

--------------------
"Professional software should have dancing pigs in pink tutus"

Posts: 241 | From: Sweden | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
MacManKrisK

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 955

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted July 18, 2003 12:41      Profile for MacManKrisK     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Originally copyright laws in the US protected a work for 25 years (at least, I think it was 25 years). However, that doesn't mean a damn thing anymore becuase there has been nothing "grandfathered" into the public domain since the invention of Mickey Mouse(c)(r)(tm). Every few years the US government graciously bows to Disney and extends the copyright law to protect the patient on Mickey Mouse(c)(r)(tm). Isn't it silly that ONE company can bend the government's rules like that? I think we're currently up to 75 year long patients now and it appears that nothing will ever make it into the public domain ever again, as long as Disney is around. *sigh* Business "ethics" at it's finest!

--------------------
"Buy low, sell high
get rich and you still die"


Posts: 2338 | From: Southeast Michigan, USA | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stereo

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 748

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted July 18, 2003 13:48      Profile for Stereo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks, Bunn1 and MMKK,

I had my time frame from the international law, which I remember since the rights from St-Exupery's work (especially 'Le petit prince' - The Little Prince or whatever it is called in English) expired a year or so ago, and the family contested it on the base that his death date was unknown, and he may have survived some time after his disapearance.

Now, about the Disney case, I guess it will be so for as long as companies will be authorised to fund political parties. Or until the population make it an election issue.

--------------------
Eppur, si muove!

Galileo Galilei

Posts: 2289 | From: Gatineau, Quebec, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
G-3PO
Geek
Member # 1851

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 18, 2003 14:58      Profile for G-3PO     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I guess all the coders that are making Mac OS X should just quit and get REAL jobs, eh? then we can all download the next and newest versions of OS X, which will come out.....waaaaaiiiiiit a minute.........

--------------------
For large values of one, one equals two, for small values of two.

Posts: 187 | From: Augusta, GA | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
littlefish
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 966

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 18, 2003 16:30      Profile for littlefish   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This is a topic that I find very interesting. Copyrighting a work is one thing, but copyrighting an idea is another. However, patents exist (pretty much) to protect an idea. As an investigator who may one day stumble across an idea worth patenting ( and this is my dream so that I might retire wealthy at the age of 40) I wamt to protect my intellectual property. However, as a philanthropist, I want everyone to benefit form the fantastic thing I discover.

Sorry if this is off-topic. If so, re-label Uilleans crazy arguments part III, and continue elsewhere.

Posts: 2421 | From: That London | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
unclefungus
Highlie
Member # 2118

Member Rated:
4
Icon 6 posted July 19, 2003 04:38      Profile for unclefungus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
ok I've been out of the loop for a minute....

Coffee Geek: I see what you mean by the real job thing, If all jobs didn't center around some form of entertainment or compfort, we'd be living in huts getting food all day for tomoorow. I simply believe that everything has it's limit and I think that people are starting to realize that the entertainment industry to make money is reaching it's limit. People are not liking this (espescially entertainers)

on the topic of littlefish's response (not ness. a reply to): about copyrights and IP, just becuase an idea may have been thought of earlier by one person than another, does not mean that it is the first persons. people sould simply suck it up and not be winey because they didn't do get a patent/copyright in time. If they are so good about ideas they should go make a better one than what they lost. but that would entail people being nice and respecting the other.... nevermind....

--------------------
Professional software should not have dancing paperclips.

Posts: 613 | From: changes, right now it's Jacksonville or Fayetteville | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
greycat

Member # 945

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted July 19, 2003 15:45      Profile for greycat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by MacManKrisK:
Originally copyright laws in the US protected a work for 25 years (at least, I think it was 25 years). However, that doesn't mean a damn thing anymore becuase there has been nothing "grandfathered" into the public domain since the invention of Mickey Mouse(c)(r)(tm).

This is essentially correct. There is no more public domain in the United States. Everything that has been created in the last XXX years is covered by an infinitely long copyright, until the Revolution comes. (Don't believe me? Don't think it's that serious? Wait and watch.)

quote:
Isn't it silly that ONE company can bend the government's rules like that?
Would that it were just one company! Oh well, there are actually only a handful of large, influential media companies left -- they keep merging together. So eventually, there may just be one Disney Time Warner America On Line Fox Inc. left.

quote:
I think we're currently up to 75 year long patients
That's "patents". But you've fallen into the second trap laid by the media companies -- you've managed to get copyrights and patents confused. This is due to their insidiously powerful propaganda campaign to promote the term "intellectual property". Not only does this term manage to get people extremely confused about trademarks, patents and copyrights - -which have nothing to do with each other -- but it also lays down the first trap of the media companies' propaganda campaign (which is equating copyright infringement with theft).

Apart from that, what you said was pretty good. At least you avoided the first trap, which most people haven't managed to do yet. (Even coffee_geek fell into it.)

quote:
Originally posted by unclefungus:
on the topic of littlefish's response (not ness. a reply to): about copyrights and IP, just becuase an idea may have been thought of earlier by one person than another, does not mean that it is the first persons. people sould simply suck it up and not be winey because they didn't do get a patent/copyright in time.

You've managed to fall into the second trap, too. You've mixed up patents (which cover the implementation details of an invention), and copyrights (which cover an artistic expression).

I'd rather leave patents out of this thread for now -- while they are a serious problem, they aren't directly relevant to the Bill being discussed.

Posts: 1522 | From: Ohio, USA | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
SupportGoddess

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 822

Icon 1 posted July 19, 2003 15:57      Profile for SupportGoddess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The easy way would be to say "hey, you can't publicly redistribute material copyrighted by someone else to everyone under the sun, either free or for profit, unless you have permission from the copyright holder."

They would be stupid to try to ban private file sharing. That boosts their sales. Who is going to go by a CD for a band they haven't heard, or that they have only heard a couple songs released for radio play?

Personally, I'm not so into all the crap that's getting multi-million dollar sales. I won't go to their concerts with a bunch of screaming, intoxicated children. Mostly I don't buy their CDs. There are plenty of musicians who can make a decent living through small venues and independent distribution. They are just as talanted, they just don't have overblown record companies pouring money into a publicity machine for them. I'd have to see this stop those musicians from distributing their work for download. Plenty of them do if you look around.

quote:
Originally posted by unclefungus:
Coffee Geek: I see what you mean by the real job thing, If all jobs didn't center around some form of entertainment or compfort, we'd be living in huts getting food all day for tomoorow. I simply believe that everything has it's limit and I think that people are starting to realize that the entertainment industry to make money is reaching it's limit. People are not liking this (espescially entertainers)



--------------------
"A heretic is a man who sees with his own eyes."
-Gotthold Ephraim Lessing

Posts: 1150 | From: The Digital Temple | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
greycat

Member # 945

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted July 19, 2003 16:09      Profile for greycat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Chapter 3 of Title 17 describes the current duration of copyrights. They are as follows:

The default copyright term is "life of the author plus 70 years". In the case of a work made by two or more authors, the 70-year clock starts ticking when the last author dies.

The copyright on a "work for hire" (anything that's copyrighted by a corporation, rather than by a person or a set of named people) lasts 95 years from the date of publication, or 120 years from the date of creation, whichever comes first. (I don't know of any cases where the work was kept hidden for 35 years, but I suppose someone might dig up some old Presley/Hendrix/Beatles tapes that have been undiscovered for that long.)

There is apparently only one well-known copyright timeline on the Internet (since Google has this one, and then a whole bunch of sites that link to this one, rather than having their own version).

Posts: 1522 | From: Ohio, USA | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Punk Rawk Poet
Assimilated
Member # 2174

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 19, 2003 18:42      Profile for Punk Rawk Poet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by greycat:
[QUOTE]This is essentially correct. There is no more public domain in the United States. Everything that has been created in the last XXX years is covered by an infinitely long copyright, until the Revolution comes. (Don't believe me? Don't think it's that serious? Wait and watch.)

Vive La Revolucion Siempre! [Big Grin] No, really this stinks. I want to know why congress is so much more damned concerned with more money for Metallica and the RIAA than they are for the homeless people living on the street of any major city, or the working poor, or even the middle class. I hope the revolution comes soon. [devil wand]

--------------------
The cat came back...
~A song from my primary school days

Posts: 447 | From: Boringville , USA | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Coffee_geek
Assimilated
Member # 1608

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted July 19, 2003 20:04      Profile for Coffee_geek   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Greycat: I say 'theft' more from a sense of personal ethics than from a legitimate legal viewpoint. I believe that people should be able to profit from the fruits of their intelect, be it music or software.

Here we stand. It's a bit like prohibition, you know. The government declared something to be illegal, which drew attention to said activity. You had rampant and socially acceptable crime, until such a time as the government realized it's mistake and reversed directions. It remains to be seen wether the masses or the government will cave first.

Hey... shouldn't the laws reflect the will of the masses? Shouldn't 'socially acceptable crime' be somewhat of a contradiction? I suppose the government has minority interests at heart, as well. Accursed complicated society...

Seeming and Dreaming,
Coffee

--------------------
We got, ten minutes to get there
We got, ten minutes to go
Throw this one in for the money
Cause the next one's for the next show

Posts: 464 | From: Varies | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged


All times are Eastern Time  
  New Poll   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | Geek Culture Home Page

© 2018 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0



homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam