Alaska Darin Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 So, so long as neither of you can watch it at the same time, it's legal? I know this might sound like I'm digging here, but this is the kind of stuff that could be brought up: Since its not illegal to let a friend watch it, could that friend set up a webcam and let me watch it WHILE he's watching it? Me at my house, him at his? Is it only illegal if we both OWN a copy? 142536[/snapback] You can watch it at the same time, you just have to be in the same room. Like I said, fair use. I don't think your scenario would be legal but I'm not a lawyer, either. Has something to do with rebroadcast and retransmission rights, which you don't buy when you purchase the media.
Nervous Guy Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 You can watch it at the same time, you just have to be in the same room. Like I said, fair use. I don't think your scenario would be legal but I'm not a lawyer, either. Has something to do with rebroadcast and retransmission rights, which you don't buy when you purchase the media. 142547[/snapback] so if you record a Bills game you can't give it to someone else?
Rico Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 I think it's interesting that it's illegal to make a copy of a movie rented from Netflix, but it's not illegal to copy that same movie if it's broadcast on a HDTV channel. AFAIC, as long as it's only for personal use, no problem.
stevestojan Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 so if you record a Bills game you can't give it to someone else? 142548[/snapback] Not without the express written consent of the NFL.
Alaska Darin Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 so if you record a Bills game you can't give it to someone else? 142548[/snapback] Probably not.
Rico Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 so if you record a Bills game you can't give it to someone else? 142548[/snapback] Nope.
Nervous Guy Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 Probably not. 142553[/snapback] Fezmid's in deep stevestojan.
stevestojan Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 well, its going to get to a point where companies that make DVD burners are going to get sued. I mean, I own one, and of course, being the responsible young man I am only use it to backup my data, or make copies of DVDs I already own, in case of scratches. But, I betting that 90% or higher of people who buy a DVD burner have NetFlix, or a Blockbuster card, or have been borrowing movies from friends alot more since they bought the burner.
Dan Gross Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 well, its going to get to a point where companies that make DVD burners are going to get sued. I mean, I own one, and of course, being the responsible young man I am only use it to backup my data, or make copies of DVDs I already own, in case of scratches. But, I betting that 90% or higher of people who buy a DVD burner have NetFlix, or a Blockbuster card, or have been borrowing movies from friends alot more since they bought the burner. 142556[/snapback] The same could be said for VCRs, cassette recorders, CD writers, etc. The movie industries even went to court to attempt to block the sale of VCR's. But, in the end, all the industry could do was try to block illegal copying though copy-prevention techniques (MacroVision, for example...). The bottom line is that you can't sue a manufacturer for making something that has a legal use, even if you can use it illegally. If I use a gun to shoot someone, can the victim (or his family) sue Smith and Wesson for making a gun that can be used to shoot someone?
Alaska Darin Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 The bottom line is that you can't sue a manufacturer for making something that has a legal use, even if you can use it illegally. If I use a gun to shoot someone, can the victim (or his family) sue Smith and Wesson for making a gun that can be used to shoot someone? 142561[/snapback] They've tried.
_BiB_ Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 They've tried. 142563[/snapback] Quite often. A coalition of Mayors tried to do it as well. S & W caved to it, a few years back.
Dan Gross Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 Fezmid's in deep stevestojan. 142555[/snapback] Technically making such copies are illegal. But a company has to measure whether to go after somene based on how much they "lost" over the deal and how much they could gain/lose from pursuing it. Just because you can figure out that someone is doing something illegal doesn't mean that you go after them. You have to pick your battles or risk losing money (and face) in chasing them down. A good example is the speed limit. It's posted at 55. A cop clocks you doing 57. Is he going to chase you down to give you a ticket (pending he sees no other issues in your driving)? No. We all know that generally a cop won't bother with you if you stay within 10 (conservatively) or 15 (pretty much true in NYS) MPH of the speed limit, because it is not worth the hassles...and so when you are driving you get frustrated when you get behind someone who is driving the speed limit. The same goes for making copies of games. If you are providing copies in the "handfuls" and are only charging for your costs, it hardly seems worth it for the NFL to "clamp down" on your pirating, especially since they don't offer every game for re-sale. But, if you put together your own highlight reel with accompanying soundtrack, and broadcast it on the web, you bet they will chase you down (as they did to a member of the Zone).
Dan Gross Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 Okay, yes, you can sue anyone for anything. But I think Steve's implication (and my responding implication) is that the suit would be a "cease and desist" order rather than a damage order. Companies tried that with VCR's and failed because of "fair use." Sure you could sue for $$$, and may get a settlement that the company might consider cheaper than pursuing (both from a financial and, again, face, perspective), but you can't expect to block production of something that can be used both legally and illegally, as really just about anything can be used illegally....like plastic cups, for instance.
DC Tom Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 So, so long as neither of you can watch it at the same time, it's legal? I know this might sound like I'm digging here, but this is the kind of stuff that could be brought up: Since its not illegal to let a friend watch it, could that friend set up a webcam and let me watch it WHILE he's watching it? Me at my house, him at his? Is it only illegal if we both OWN a copy? 142536[/snapback] You're at least peripherially involved in the computer industry, right? Think of the typical software EULA...to put it simply, it allows "exclusive use". Which means that you can sell or give me your Windows ME installation CDs (not that I'd want them), IF you uninstall it from your machines first. Same basic principle at work here: you can give me your "Howard the Duck" DVD when you're done with it (again, not that I'd want it), and it's legal because my use of it then precludes your use. Your webcam idea, though...technically that would be a broadcast. For it to be legal, I'd imagine your friend would at the very least have to pay royalties.
Corp000085 Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 On a tangent, I will say that this is one BIG reason I'm against wireless networking -- if you don't know what you're doing (and most home users don't), it'd be trivial for a neighbor to download stuff under your name and get you in trouble for it. I havn't heard of this happening yet, but I don't see why it could. From my living room alone, I can get 10 wireless signals and of those, 5 of them are unprotected. In other words, I could download illegal stuff from the homes of those 5 people and they'd get blamed for it, not me. Wireless is bad IMHO. Anyway, off to bed; hope the thread doesn't die by tomorrow morning. ah, the wireless debate. I use a wireless router for my wife's laptop. I have all the necessary security implimented (not broadcasing ssid, wpa-psk, mac address filtering, changing ssid/wpa passwords/admin passwords weekly, etc.) On her computer, i am able to see 6 and connect to 5 other wirless networks somewhere around my apartment complex. Basically, through stupidity (naming your computer/SSID your surname), i've found all of victims and explained how to lock their networks down. I've made close to $200 worth of various gift certificates through this method. I'm fairly confident that my own network is pretty secure. Even so, i know my computer itself is extremely secure if someone happens to find their way through my NAT. btw, i have the d link di-624 c2.
BF_in_Indiana Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 Ya know what I hate? I hate when we are having a somewhat coherent discussion (call it argument if you will), where both sides are actually giving their sides, some people are explaining from experience some actual facts, and others just giving their $.02. But then BF_In_Indiana has to come in and, like a monkey throwing his own feces, mess up the whole damn thing. Seriously, BF, go back and look at this thread. It was heated, yes, as it is a highly controversial subject. But then you come in and try to bring up your "boy" Artest. Why? WHY? Why can't we ever just have a decent, well thought out argument around here without you coming around to lick up the windows when they get frosty? 142442[/snapback] Why do I compare it with Artest? It has nothing to do with what I think about Artest really. I've moved past that. I just find it highly amusing that a crime such as theft is so clear cut in the eyes of these two and yet assault is different depending on the item you use. Many people here probably have Bills games on tape. Did you know that's illegal? I'm sure you do, but that doesn't stop you. I forgot though, it's so much easier to tell someone else how to run their life than it is to run your own. As for Nanker, they aren't out to get me, they just think they know it all. They don't.
Fezmid Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 Technically making such copies are illegal. But a company has to measure whether to go after somene based on how much they "lost" over the deal and how much they could gain/lose from pursuing it......snip..... The same goes for making copies of games. If you are providing copies in the "handfuls" and are only charging for your costs, it hardly seems worth it for the NFL to "clamp down" on your pirating, especially since they don't offer every game for re-sale. But, if you put together your own highlight reel with accompanying soundtrack, and broadcast it on the web, you bet they will chase you down (as they did to a member of the Zone). Agreed on the game copying and whether it's worth it to go after damages. Do a search on eBay, and you'll find tons of people selling NFL games on DVD and the NFL doesn't even care to go after THEM. I will disagree with the highlight reel thing though. Personally, I feel that that falls under "derivitive work" which is actually legal in our copyright laws. For example, Weird Al does parady songs of other famous songs. Legally, he doesn't need to ask any of the original artists for permission because it's considered a "derivitive work." (he does anyway, to be nice, but he doesn't have to). I'd consider a highlight reel to be considered the exact same thing (but I'm no lawyer).. I think the NFL would lose that case, but who knows, and since the NFL has lots of high-priced lawyers, you'd be fighting an uphill battle regardless of whether you were right or wrong. CW
stevestojan Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 I just find it highly amusing that a crime such as theft is so clear cut in the eyes of these two and yet assault is different depending on the item you use. 142595[/snapback] It IS different depending on the item you use, you dipshit! If i hit you over the head with shovel, or hit you in the face with a styrofoam cooler, BELIEVE me, you will then know the difference. You're logic should really be documented. It is so amazingly assinine sometimes that I really feel other people outside of TBD are missing out here.
BF_in_Indiana Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 Than tell me how copying a DVD is like stealing a car? It's different. 15 dollars or 30,000.
VABills Posted December 2, 2004 Posted December 2, 2004 Than tell me how copying a DVD is like stealing a car? It's different. 15 dollars or 30,000. 142613[/snapback] Tell you what, go to Ben Franklin's, obviously steal a candy bar and walk out, so the clerks see you. Then explain your logic to the police when they arrest you.
Recommended Posts