Book publisher files mass BitTorrent lawsuit

[gsquared]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

As is theft of cable services, as far as that goes. Is that not a crime in S.A.?

Yes, it is, in terms of the Copyright Act. To get even further off-topic (for which I apologise) -egad, but I am humble today- it gets a bit complicated, because even if there is no act of parliament prohibiting an action (or mandating one), something could still be a crime if it offends the common law. Which is an uncodified set of laws inherited from the Dutch. And the Romans (Roman-Dutch law). To determine what the common law says, you dig into previous court cases, failing which you read what Roman-Dutch law scholars had to say and at times even what the Romans had to say. Our entire law of inheritance is based on Roman law. And is still mostly not codified. Which is why until recently a minimum one year course in Latin was a prerequisite for becoming a lawyer.

[Kevin8or]

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Kevin8or

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by DustyDisks

Which is illegal, so it is a crime. What ever you care to call it, theft or piracy, the fact remains it is illegal in much of the world.

It is a civil offence in most of the world, not a criminal one.

What you choose to call it matters not a jot. How it is defined under the law is all that matters.

Under the law it is not theft it is copyright infringement.

Originally Posted by DustyDisks

Splitting hairs on how the act is defined, and the consequence perceived. It boils down what is right or wrong. And piracy by any name or act, is wrong.

The one that uploads the copy of the original real book bears the most blame.

They that download and use it, must answer the ethical/moral and legal questions that come from doing so with stolen/copied intellectual property.

With some the debate will never end.

Is it right or wrong?

Imho it is wrong.

Frankly I totally agree with pretty much everything in this post.

However, right or wrong aside, it is not theft it is copyright infringement.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

In some jurisdictions in the US, theft is an unlawful taking of property that *permanently* deprives the owner of the property's value and use.

In other jurisdictions, including mine, theft is an unlawful taking of property that deprives the owner of any part of the property's value and use.

Copyright infringement is theft in my jurisdiction.

As is theft of cable services, as far as that goes. Is that not a crime in S.A.?

So could you please link to the details of anyone being charged or sued for theft over the illegal copying and distribution of copyrighted works?

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

So could you please link to the details of anyone being charged or sued for theft over the illegal copying and distribution of copyrighted works?

I don't know of any cases. But I know that my state's theft statute explicitly covers "transferring or reproducing:
(A) recorded sounds; or
(B) a live performance;

without consent of the owner of the master recording or the live performance, with intent to distribute the reproductions for a profit."

And more generally covers exerting unauthorized control over the property of another with the intent to deprive them of any part of its value or use.

[kennyc]

I've linked to judges opinions stating "theft" in the past. PKFFFFFW knows it, he's just playing ignorant.....or more likely he's not playing.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I've linked to judges opinions stating "theft" in the past. PKFFFFFW knows it, he's just playing ignorant.....or more likely he's not playing.

Judges opinions are just that, opinions. They are not law and you know that.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

I don't know of any cases. But I know that my state's theft statute explicitly covers "transferring or reproducing:
(A) recorded sounds; or
(B) a live performance;

without consent of the owner of the master recording or the live performance, with intent to distribute the reproductions for a profit."

And more generally covers exerting unauthorized control over the property of another with the intent to deprive them of any part of its value or use.

That is interesting. I'd be interested in reading the original copy of your state's statue. It's the only one in the world I've ever even heard of that explicitly states such.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

Judges opinions are just that, opinions. They are not law and you know that.

Judges opinions ARE law, you clearly don't have a clue about what law is.

You know that you've been told this before.

[DustyDisks]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

Judges opinions are just that, opinions. They are not law and you know that.

Tell that to any judge and see what will happen! If he is having a good day you may escape some cell time.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Judges opinions ARE law, you clearly don't have a clue about what law is.

Actually no they are not. What their opinions do is set precedent. Precedent is not law.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by DustyDisks

Tell that to any judge and see what will happen! If he is having a good day you may escape some cell time.

lol

Just because a judge can jail you for disagreeing with them and pointing out the truth does not make them infallible. Hence why there is an appeals court.

It's kind of akin to the biggest bully in the play ground. They can beat you up for disagreeing with them but the principle can always expel them for doing so.

[Kevin8or]

Copyright Frequently Asked Questions:

Copyright is a form of legal protection automatically provided to the authors of “original works of authorship,” including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works.

U.S. copyright law generally gives the author/creator or owner of an original creative work an exclusive right to:

• Reproduce (copy) or distribute the original work to the public (e.g., create and sell copies of a film)
• Create new works based upon the original work (e.g., make a movie based on a book)
• Perform or display the work publicly (e.g., perform a play)

Violation of one of these rights is called copyright infringement. However, the use may be authorized by copyright limitations (such as fair use) described below.

Thought this might help.

[hidari]

Actually Kennyc he does have a clue. Just because you disagree with him is not reason enough to say that he has no clue. Actually a rather weak retort from you considering most of your posts are not so caustic. Lots of people download books... legally and illegally...

Maybe you should say you do not have a clue about what law is as pertaining to copyright infringement.... That said I am sure most MR members have broken a few laws this week..Like Jaywalking, making an illegal U-turn... etc... Both of which could cause Death if done at the wrong time. Never heard of copyright infringement causing death...so Maybe we should all take a chill pill on the *evilness* of it all...

Originally Posted by kennyc

Judges opinions ARE law, you clearly don't have a clue about what law is.