View Single Post
Old 11-08-2012, 04:28 AM   #235
BoldlyDubious
what if...?
BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.BoldlyDubious ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
BoldlyDubious's Avatar
 
Posts: 209
Karma: 750870
Join Date: Feb 2011
Device: paper & electrophoretic
Excellent points, Elfwreck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck View Post
That would require a drastic change in law. Right now, you're not responsible for the illegal distribution of things you own if they're stolen from you
You are right. Ok, here is the first modification to my proposal:
1) if you have notified to the police a theft of property which included items usable to access your media library before the illegal distribution occurs, you cannot be held responsible for distribution of media purchased before the notification date.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck View Post
that phrasing doesn't seem to have an allowance for "college roommate hacked into my computer and copied all the files."
Yes, it doesn't. As digital data increasingly becomes an integral part of our lives, our responsibility and perception of the issues related to its management should rise accordingly. Especially when our management of the "digital" part of our life damages someone else.
If you gave your computer's password to your idiot roommate and your files end up on some torrent site, you have a responsibility in that. However, here is a second modification:
2) both of the owner of the file and of the actual distributor are responsible if illegal distribution of that file occurs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck View Post
There's also the issue of defining "personally responsible." How do you prosecute someone who *didn't do the act* but is somehow "responsible?"
Here, I stick to my original idea. If the file is yours because you purchased it (and you didn't denounce its theft to the police) you have a responsibility to do whatever is needed to ensure that it doesn't get illegally distributed. If I work in a bank and keep my bank passwords in an unencrypted file in my PC, and my roommate uses them to rob the bank, I think I am legally prosecutable. Isn't it like that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck View Post
Does that mean the person who did the distributing is off the hook entirely--that if you get an unwitting permission from someone to "borrow some books to read," and then load them to the torrents and fileshare sites, they, not you, are guilty of copyright infringement?
That would not do. Already addressed by modification #2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck View Post
And "absence of personal ID by the owner" is also hard to prove. What counts as ID? If I knew it was downloaded by DragonBane381, R33DERG33K, and Fan-of-ebooks, does that count as personally identifying them?
This needs work. However, as a first approximation:

3) A media publisher finds online a file owned by BoldlyDubious, and distributed by someone nicknamed DragonBane381. They call the police, and the police sends to BoldlyDubious an official note saying that within 15 days they expect the real name and surname of the person associated to the nickname DragonBane381 to be provided to them. If such person confirms to be DragonBane381, BoldlyDubious is off the hook (but DragonBane381 isn't). If the person does not confirm to be DragonBane381, BoldlyDubious is prosecutable.

If the person contacted by the police does not confirm its identity as DragonBane381, two cases are possible:
(i) the person actually wasn't DragonBane381, so BoldlyDubious gave the file to someone without knowing her/his identity and deserves prosecution;
(ii) the person really was DragonBane381 but did not admit it, so BoldlyDubious is responsible for giving the file to someone inclined to do something unlawful with it, and deserves prosecution.

What do you think?

Last edited by BoldlyDubious; 11-08-2012 at 04:32 AM.
BoldlyDubious is offline   Reply With Quote