Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
That is the point of a court - to determine whether or not the person is guilty. If there is evidence to suggest that someone may reasonably be supposed to be guilty - eg a copyright holder has personally downloaded a file from the IP address of that person - then that seems like a reasonable circumstance for instituting legal action. They may indeed be innocent - that is for the court to decide.
|
well harry here you're really making my point for me, which is that this law does NOT work that way ; it's not collecting reliable evidence (there is no way to do that, given the way it will be implemented, as many have pointed out, for purely technical reasons) and most importantly the sanctions are NOT the result of a legal action nor decided by a court (ie a responsible judicial entity) after hearing arguments from BOTH parties. that is the whole problem here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vivaldirules
(pokes head in the door wearing as much armor as he could wear to ask an innocent question)
If, instead, a law was passed that was reliable (not subject to possible false accusations) and protected people's privacy but was effective at detecting illegal file-sharing, would it have been acceptable? I realize that without the details of such a hypothetical law, it's hard to say anything at all. But I'm trying to find out how much of people's pretty boisterous objections are simply because it's a law designed to protect intellectual property rights for which you personally may or may not have any respect for.
|
well, precisely the problem with this law is that it is neither reliable NOR does it do anything to protect / encourage content creators (which, ironically, is the pretext of its creation). i'm against THIS LAW and THIS IMPLEMENTATION OF IT, because it does not address the real issue in any way, nor is it reliable (nor can it be), and it relies completely on violating my right to privacy, and can still potentially (very easily) lead to me being punished for something which i am innocent of ! i
would be in favor of a law like you describe, although to be quite honest i'm really not sure such a method can exist / be effective (for technical reasons).
so, to put it another way (and to answer what seems to be your underlying question) : yes, i am completely in favor of remunerating content creators. i support authors, musicians, etc. and want to encourage them. i am in favor of laws protecting their IP rights
within reason (i'm also in favor of a radical reform of current copyright laws, however, since they are currently bloated and abusive ; but that is a whole nother sack of knots, so let's not get into it, we've got other threads for that). the problem is this law does not address any of those issues.