03-02-2010, 10:13 AM | #16 |
The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠
Posts: 71,640
Karma: 306652114
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Norfolk, England
Device: Kindle Voyage
|
|
03-02-2010, 10:15 AM | #17 |
The Dank Side of the Moon
Posts: 35,872
Karma: 118716293
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire
|
|
Advert | |
|
03-02-2010, 10:21 AM | #18 |
The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠
Posts: 71,640
Karma: 306652114
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Norfolk, England
Device: Kindle Voyage
|
|
03-02-2010, 10:25 AM | #19 |
What the Dog Saw
Posts: 311
Karma: 981684
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dunn Loring
Device: Sony PRS-650, Surface3
|
|
03-02-2010, 10:41 AM | #20 | |||||
Wizard
Posts: 4,293
Karma: 529619
Join Date: May 2007
Device: iRex iLiad, DR800SG
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
Advert | |
|
03-02-2010, 10:49 AM | #21 | |||
Wizard
Posts: 4,293
Karma: 529619
Join Date: May 2007
Device: iRex iLiad, DR800SG
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
03-02-2010, 10:50 AM | #22 |
Guru
Posts: 895
Karma: 4383958
Join Date: Nov 2007
Device: na
|
I say we leave it up to the law makers. They called it copyright infringment to distinguish it from other laws like theft, why confuse matters again?
|
03-02-2010, 10:53 AM | #23 |
Wizard
Posts: 4,293
Karma: 529619
Join Date: May 2007
Device: iRex iLiad, DR800SG
|
|
03-02-2010, 11:06 AM | #24 | |
Banned
Posts: 2,094
Karma: 2682
Join Date: Aug 2009
Device: N/A
|
Quote:
The only confusion comes from the moralists, who insist on other terms. And using the terms like Piracy and Theft drives the debate into an emotive rather than logical area, which favours the darknet communities and not the proponents of fair copyright systems. Last edited by DawnFalcon; 03-02-2010 at 11:10 AM. |
|
03-02-2010, 11:10 AM | #25 |
Wizard
Posts: 2,300
Karma: 1121709
Join Date: Feb 2009
Device: Amazon Kindle 1
|
I view the harm done as similar to theft, as a person has obtained material that is not freely available without paying for it.
But it's not exactly the same since no physical item has been taken and at best a potential sale was lost (as the person may not have ever bought the item they pirated--with a physical item if they hadn't, at least it could be sold to someone else and now can't since the item is gone). So I'm ok with coming up with some other term to label the act of stealing/illegally downloading copyrighted digital content. For me the key is that we as a society come to view illegal downloading as just as wrong as stealing a physical item. As we move into the digital era and eventually ONLY have digital versions of albums, movies, books etc. traditional theft will simply no longer be possible. Copyright infringement, piracy, whatever you want to call it will be the only what "theft" like activities can cost companies sales in these industries. As long as we start treating is as wrong, as a minor misdemeanor like shoplifting, then I couldn't care less what label we put on the act. I'll leave that to the people who like arguing terminology and semantics. And I've spent way too much time discussing such issues lately, so that's all I'll say in this thread as my views on the topic are clear. Last edited by dmaul1114; 03-02-2010 at 11:12 AM. |
03-02-2010, 11:11 AM | #26 |
The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠
Posts: 71,640
Karma: 306652114
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Norfolk, England
Device: Kindle Voyage
|
Now we're getting into things that differ from country to country. In the UK there is a clause in the copyright law that permits making a backup of a computer program. An ebook is not a computer program. Currently, in the UK it is not permitted to make a backup copy of an ebook, just as it is not permitted to copy a CD onto a hard disk.
Copyright in the UK specifies that copying the work requires the permission of the owner of the copyright. There are "Fair dealing" exceptions, which specify when permission is not required. None apply in the two cases mentioned, and in the UK both are copyright infringement. It may be that you do not consider any personal digital copying to be copyright infringement. In the UK you are wrong. But I don't think we need to get into the very fine detail of national copyright laws. If you think my examples don't apply in your country, perhaps you can think up equivalent ones yourself. Or perhaps you think my distinction between copyright infringement of a digital file of which you already have a copy, and copyright infringement which involves obtaining a copy of a file you didn't have before, is not valid? |
03-02-2010, 11:14 AM | #27 |
Banned
Posts: 2,094
Karma: 2682
Join Date: Aug 2009
Device: N/A
|
dmaul11!4-
Your "key" is the one to the door called "IP should be abolished". Step away and put the key down. By conflating completely inequivalent offences - theft is allways wrong, making a copy is necessary for the operation of computers and is often otherwise fair use, and is wrong only in certain situations you're being your own worst enemy as far as copyright goes. Moreover, there is no appetite outside America and a few corporate boardrooms for labeling major parts of the community as criminals. Respecting rights and sensible prices - and not worrying about a fringe movement - has proven the only effective antidote to darknets so far. pdurrant - Equally, in the UK they're simply un-prosecutable. It's not in the public interest to chase those cases. Of course, the music industry is generously trying to use that as a starting base for negotiations, giving us the right to do what they already cannot act on rather than with the de-facto situation (i.e. they're trying to make out they're already making effective concessions, when they're not...) Last edited by DawnFalcon; 03-02-2010 at 11:17 AM. |
03-02-2010, 11:19 AM | #28 | |
The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠
Posts: 71,640
Karma: 306652114
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Norfolk, England
Device: Kindle Voyage
|
Quote:
Having the same term for two different things leads to confusion. |
|
03-02-2010, 11:19 AM | #29 |
Addict
Posts: 266
Karma: 1378
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle / San Carlos, Sonora, Mexico
Device: Kindle & WiFi Nook & PocketBook IQ
|
I think there might be another category of "copyright infringement":
Those that honor the intent of the copyright of an eBook as if it were a paper book - regardless of the attempts to: - limit rights via licensing agreements - artificially restrict purchases based on geography - constrain what devices are used to read via DRM or format |
03-02-2010, 11:34 AM | #30 | |
The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠
Posts: 71,640
Karma: 306652114
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Norfolk, England
Device: Kindle Voyage
|
Quote:
A copy can be authorised or unauthorised. If unauthorised, if can be "fair use" (US) or "fair dealing" (UK - much more restricted). So a copy can be authorised, or unauthorised and fair use/fair dealing, or unauthorised and not fair use/fair dealing. I am suggesting that there is another split in the unauthorised/not fair use class. In the US, I agree that fair use covers most personal copying of an authorised copy of a work, and so my distinction is less needed. In the UK a wide range of acts that most would consider innocuous are not covered by fair dealing. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Google guilty of copyright infringement in France | amjbrown | News | 0 | 12-18-2009 09:17 AM |
Rowling wins copyright infringement case | HarryT | News | 127 | 09-20-2008 04:52 AM |
In Copyright? - Copyright Renewal Database launched | Alexander Turcic | News | 26 | 07-09-2008 09:36 AM |
Open-source Mplayer site closed for patent infringement | Alexander Turcic | Lounge | 2 | 03-15-2005 03:46 AM |