Whatever it is I don't see how you can call it counterfeiting, because there is certainly no intent to deceive anyone. A copy of a digital file is for all intents and purposes the real deal, not a counterfeit. I guess the correct legal term would be copyright infringement. Back in the day of vinyl albums and compact cassettes those of us who happened to have a copy of an album would gladly make a cassette copy for a friend - without monetary compensation. (Sometimes these friends would reciprocate by making tapes of their own albums, though.) The same thing happened with VHS tapes. The ease of copying digital data and distributing it on the net just makes this kind of phenomenon run wild. How many of the recipients of illegally shared files would have been potential buyers if said files would not have been available in this way? Who knows, but certainly not all of them. Some people have been known to buy CD albums they already have as digital files. I have no idea if this applies to porn. Anyway I don't want to get any deeper into this tedious topic.
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Feb 24 2010 : 3:51PM
That is the correct term, but is also counterfeiting in the sense that you are makiing a copy of an original to sell, or give, in place of the original with the intention to avoid paying or having the recipient of the copy pay the rightful owner. Counterfeiting, it's true, normally has an element of deception in it, but I don't think deception is required for it to be counterfeiting
http://www.answers.com/topic/counterfeit None of these definitions seem to support the applicability of the term in this case. However: `When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Feb 24 2010 : 5:07PM
Fine, if you say so. But the semantic or forensic gymnastics here do not alter the fact that downloading pirated videos from any source that sidesteps compensating the maker properly for his work is unfair, criminal, and threatens to greatly reduce the amount and quality of product available in the future.
"That guy" is not so unusual or rare. On the filesharing forums, there are plenty of legendary characters who have developed quite a reputation for ripping and uploading the best content, using the best encodes, providing the best screencaps emblazoned with their own unique logo. They might be getting some form of compensation, but my impression is they enjoy the fame and adulation and praise from the grateful downloaders. Think of it as a hobby. Like stamp collecting or fishing or video gaming or scrapbooking or photography or whatever...all involve spending time/money/energy on something just for the fun of it and not necessarily for financial gain.
Yes. Seriously. Read the fine print at the various filestorage sites and you'll discover they're barely above the level of being a scam, from the standpoint of how much download GB translates to how much money. I'm sure the owners of the tube sites and forums and filestores are making money from advertisers and subscribers. But I'm talking about only the individuals who upload to fileshares; the mechanism for them making big money just doesn't exist.
Yes, really. Seriously. I'm sorry to say it, but you're coming across as remarkably clueless about the things you're railing against. ninja1's description as a "hobby" is exactly right, in my opinion. AFAIK large-scale erotica/porn file-sharing started close to 20 years ago, with scanned pics from Playboy, Penthouse etc., then as connection speeds increased and more and more material was available directly in digital form it became ever more wide-spread moving first to website pic content (Amateur Teen Kingdom and the like), then video clips, then DVD rips, then full-size DVDs. But one thing that - in my impression anyway - has never really changed is that the overwhelming number of people are posting at most for the adoration and notoriety. In a way, the filesharing scene is the naughty little brother to the hacking scene. Are there some uploaders who make money from it? Probably, though my understanding is that the money potentially to be earned from torrent or ddl kickbacks is nominal and not exactly a way to make a living. (The people hosting tubes, forums or torrent trackers are probably a different matter, but they rarely provide the content themselves.) Industry members often act as though the people distributing website content or ripped DVDs are doing so maliciously, but the fact of the matter is that practically none of those people even think that far, especially the huge number of people who only engage in some small-scale uploading, e.g. somebody re-posting a dozen scenes of his favourite starlet. Frankly, it's rather stunning that the porn industry seemingly hasn't learned at least that lesson from the music industry/Napster/etc. mess. Short of government intervention or creative out-of-the-box thinking (as iTunes was for music), you're fighting a losing battle because the mindset you're taking issue with is just so engrained in the population by now. And on the technical side you'll always be one step behind the latest distribution technology. So, feel free to continue with simplistic rants about "stealing", but as this thread (and many others before it) shows the situation is a lot more diverse and complicated on the other side - from ex-customers who consider downloading self-defense against being ripped off by crappy porn, to people who simply wouldn't bother getting porn at all if they couldn't get it for free (but hey, just keep treating every illegal download as a lost sale - that PR strategy worked so well for the RIAA and MPAA), to people who don't even think about the issue at all and just act on impulse when they run into a downloadable file that looks interesting.
Video killed the radio star, digital killed the pornostar. Maybe it'll be a good thing, rather than fantazising over other people fucking, we'll actually go back to fucking each other. Hmmm.... that makes me think, is porn birth control. Would there be a population explosion if porn ceased to exist? Nothing says romance like anal sex.
No my argument stands up because I stated "paid for the rights to air it, based on the negotiations that the studio and broadcast network came to". Someone who buys a DVD hasn't paid for the rights to air it, in fact it specifically states that they have not purchased such rights on most, if not all DVDs. If the person who wants to upload it contacts the studio and arranges a financial agreement for both sides so that the uploader has permission to do that they can. But that's not what they are doing. Buying a DVD does not give one permission to reproduce or broadcast. Sorry.
Sorry, wrong again. This would only be the case if the original purchaser gave you the original DVD they bought. Nice try though. You are just rationalizing why your theft is okay.
Actually in many instances that is what happens. Someone buys a dvd and digitally shares it with their friend and they share it with a friend and so on. And the only issue with that is that the company that manufactures the content has possibly been denied potential profit, because as stated previously it is difficult to ascertain whether or not someone was actually going to purchase the content or just downloaded it because someone else made it available via sharing. And if the main issue is "potential" profit for big corporations then it's apparent why it's not taken seriously by the public. Edited by - Zaer on 2/25/2010 7:20:54 AM
[Link]
Mojo Deactivated User
1223 Posts 9/03
Posted - Feb 25 2010 : 11:53AM
As has been said, it's always happened. People used to make copies of records and tapes and pass them out among friends. Kids used to make copies of their floppy disk computer games and pass them out at school (sometimes for a few pence/cents a disk!). People used to make copies of VHS movies and then of DVDs. Did the game, music and film companies go out of business because of it? Maybe if the porn companies made anti-pirate software for their disks just as the game and film companies have then they wouldn't have so much trouble with file sharing. Then there’s the factor of where you live. It only occurred to me the other day that only about ten years ago it was totally illegal to own porn in the UK! Even now it’s almost impossible to get hold of in the shops, unless you pay extortionate prices in the occasional sex shop that’re dotted here and there around the country. And when you do find the odd sex shop they tend to have a mediocre selection (even then they might be pirates). Yep, unless we want to go through the bother of sending off to the States or Euroland and still pay above that of Americans or Euros through extra postage, possible import duty and the possibility of customs still confiscating the disks through ignorance, we are pretty much buggered. Nope, there's absolutely NO question of renting either. And don’t get me started on returning damaged or incompatible cheap disks. But to answer your accusation, I've got a bit of both. I've got a lot of original disks that I've bought from this site and I've got a lot of disks I've made myself from stuff I've downloaded. Oh, and unlike the original stuff I've gone through the rigour of sending to the US for, everything I've downloaded is exactly what I want and plays perfectly on the high spec disks I use. And no, I've not used them for anyone other than myself.
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Feb 25 2010 : 12:02PM
There are side issues as well, which have to do with the way the product is distributed at present =What revenue is a movie distributor (be it adult or mainstream) making or "deprived of" when his legitimate DVD copy falls into the hands of a video store, who subsequently rents it out to his clients. The video store has only bought that copy, but the video store owner has rented it out to other people for a small modest fee. The movie producer has only earned money in ONE sale transaction, while the video store owner keeps making money from it by subsequent rentals. I have never heard of producers complain by this state of affairs. But they keep pushing Congress to extent copyright life of their product. =If the renter was really interested in the product he would have bought it and the producer would have made a lot more money from it. How many people rent a movie and subsequently decide to buy it (mainstream or porn)? No doubt a very small percentage. So basically a large portion of the population is accessing these movies not by direct DVD sales, but by rental (see the success of Netflix, etc), and other streams such as cable/satellite, pay-per-view, pay etc. I believe Vivid recently made a statement that indicated that their recvenue stream from non-DVD sales had way overpassed DVD sales. Has "illegal" web download of Vivid's product really affected their sales? It is also curious to note that in many porn blogs where movies and clips are posted Vivid's product seems to be rather absent. The same goes for mainstream: without DVD, these movies would only b exhibited in movie theaters and over TV waves. =But porn is different. There are no longer movie theaters exhibiting porn. The product is no longer being shot on film, and distributed on discs or on websites (via direct sales or downloads). As it is, and for the last 25-30 years, the porn industry has gone totally video/digital. Aside from the larger companies like Vivid/Wicked/Adamm & Eve, all the other distributiors live off DVD sales and some web downloads. Their concerns and preoccupations are radically different frommainstream producers. On top of that, the afterlife of most adult DVD movies is rather limited, and many companies active only a few years ago and many movie titles produced also a few years back have disappeared. It makes the "shelf" life of an adult title rather limited, and on top of that you have to deal with oversaturation of porn product (which has little to do with so called "piracy"). =Whenever discussion comes up over illegal downloads, much is said about the desire and necessity to educate young people in this awful and illegal practice. But look at the way internet providers have pushed their product: they speak of fast(er) downloads, download of songs and movies, etc. This was even before legitimate companies like iTunes were set up. What do they or you think people were going to download? =The internet is a place where a lot of information is out there, and is free. It is impossible if not difficult to say you can get this,you can watch this, you can download THIS but you can't get THAT. It gets very blurry...
I just have one question - I have legally purchased a dvd and have watched it so many times that I am now tired of the damn thing. My friend and I agree to swap. I give him my legally purchased dvd and he gives me one that I want from his collection of legally purchased dvds in exchange. Is this transaction legal acceptable moral or not?
If they are digitally sharing it, than that is not what I described. What I described is when someone buys a DVD and then gives away that specific DVD that they bought. Digital sharing didn't come into what I said anywhere.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Feb 25 2010 : 1:35PM
Here is my question. Don't people know the difference between right and wrong? Justification is not something that makes what is wrong a right. It is so simple, buying a dvd does not give you the right to upload it on a torrent site, nor does it give you the right to make copies for sale. Period. Edited by - hollywood woody on 2/25/2010 1:37:40 PM
[Link]
MikeSouth Deactivated User
511 Posts 11/02
Posted - Feb 25 2010 : 1:48PM
Thank you woody. its just plain old common sense and anyone with a brain knows and understands it no matter how hard they try to justify it otherwise. Its like Jules Jordan claiming he doesn't support piracy by distributing Brazzers. It is what it is no matter how you try to spin it.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Feb 25 2010 : 2:11PM
It doesn't matter if they make 2 cents or 2 million dollars on it, they are doing the wrong thing, which happens to be illegal, and drains money from the people that own it.
Charn, give me a break! It is standard practice for movie companies (both porn and mainstream) to send selected people copies of their movies to watch in exchange for an honest review. This practice does not encourage piracy in the least, and may even help sales if a good review is given!
sometimes i don't realize i've made a great joke until i see the reactions. this time i was serious in my applications of logic and psychology. filesharers may now think writing a review is the key to guilt-free downloading.
I know i may have not the right words to describe what i think but i think mojo has a point when he says it may have something to do "where" you live. People who live in a place where you can get almost anything any day may not know what it feels like. Imagine if you would like to taste a special fruit. It´s immpossible and/or forbidden for you to even get this fruit delivered. While it´s not a problem for a lot of people in other countries to get/eat this fruit. What are you supposed to do ? Say fuck it and that´s it ... maybe so but not everyone has that power. Even worse ... he punishes (by downloading it for free) the companies who produce these "fruits" instead of going against his homelands stupid laws regarding adult entertainment. If i wouldn´t have found another way of getting my "fix" i may be doing it the same way. Why do you think i stopped ordering adult material from the us ? Because if those assholes from customs want to jerk of they can order their own videos not take mine !!! It still amazes me when i think about that it´s still impossible for a us company to put certain sex acts into a dvd and sell them thru whatever channels. I´m speaking of sex acts between consenting adults over 18 who are legal in another country What does an us customer do if he wants to see/own dvds with this certain sex act ? He can search for places who secretly distribute them and may run in a lot of trouble. Or he could search the net for them. But can he risk to order any of those dvds ? The best and safest way is ... you guest it And as long as he uses it for himself the problem is not really there Cube Edited by - cubesnake on 2/26/2010 6:51:38 AM
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Feb 26 2010 : 8:33AM
I don't think anyone is saying there aren't good reasons for downloading free porn. The reason above, unavailability through other means in many places, is a good reason. Hell, not having to pay for the stuff is a good reason. There are, as a review of this thread makes clear, TONS of justifications for downloading free porn. But it's STILL stealing. It's STILL taking potential income from those who are in the business, and it STILL threatens the future of porn, promising to at least reduce the quantity, variety, and quality of what matters to all of us. All of the justification, all of the semantic sleight of hand trying to call stealing something it isn't, all of the accusations of porn makers' complicity in the piracy of their own stuff, all the claims that the porn business is still making billions, doesn't change the simple fact that piracy is theft, free porn on the 'net encourages that theft, and, in the end all of US are going to pay for it with a greatly diminished product.
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Feb 26 2010 : 12:11PM
The mainstream and porn companies all get sanctimonious, holy and ultra moralistic when it gets to THEIR product: "it's mine and FOREVER AND EVER, it cost me money to make it, I tell you when and how I make it available to you, and you got to pay me X, or otherwise you are a criminal". Moviemaking/Hollywood was build on copyright and patent infringements. Moviemaking accounting is a laugh. All you got to read the number of legal actions that has generated over the years. The same thing with plagiarism (be it music or movies), and dipping and using real life stories and fairy tales that someone wrote years ago. The deceptive ways movies have been packaged, especially in porn. I wonder sometimes if the porn product (say DVD) was available ONLY directly for sale from the producer. If there was not internet and no dowloading and no way to duplicate a DVD, and no middle distributors or video stores. I wonder how many movies the porn industry would make in a given month/year, what a DVD would cost, how many customers would actually buy it. Go back to the early 1980's, at the advent of the video revolution. A VHS/Beta porn tape would cost over US$80 (put it into a 1980 context and you get the idea that it was basically a rental market, which was the same for mainstream movie industry). Cubesnake has a valid point, I think that people in general are honest and don't want to steal or infringe on other people's rights, but sometimes the situation is such that it becomes unavoidable.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Feb 26 2010 : 1:33PM
With all due respect, that is probably the worst justification I have ever heard, totally absurd. They would start out their review with," I recently stole this movie off the internet and here is what I think." First of all their credibility word be questionable because they are a thief. Legit reviews come from people who are sent screeners by the company for that purpose. Why would somebody who is going to write a review steal it from a site when they can get it from me for free? That makes no sense at all. You win with the most ridiculous justification for thievery.
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Feb 26 2010 : 1:39PM
Len801 wrote:Allow me to amend my post above by adding the following: Making up facts about moviemaking/Hollywood doesn't change that piracy is stealing either Tell me ONE example of anything in the movie industry that suggests to you it was "built on copyright and patent infringements." I would address whatever else you are trying to say if I could figure out what it was. What does the one time cost of VHS tapes have to do with pirating porn? And are you really suggesting that porn wouldn't sell if people couldn't steal it off the internet? Because THAT is what you are saying and it's patently ridiculous. The days before the internet were the fucking golden age of porn sales. By the way, what the porn producers make IS theirs, no one else's, not "for ever and ever," but, generally, for 56 years. That's the law, and YOU are breaking that law every time you download without paying. Edited by - duefuss on 2/26/2010 1:42:42 PM Edited by - duefuss on 2/26/2010 1:44:40 PM
[Link]
Zaer Deactivated User
249 Posts 10/07
Posted - Feb 26 2010 : 1:53PM
Losing potential income isn't equivalent to losing actual income and as digital files can be copied and shared infinitely there is no actual loss of a physical product, ergo the content producer isn't deprived of anything except possibly "potential" profit. Because someone will initially purchase the product and share it with someone else who shares it with someone else and so on. So the people who are having the content shared with them haven't deprived the content producer of anything except possibly potential profit, because as has already been stated it is difficult to ascertain whether or not the person who received the shared content would have bought it had it not been shared with them. And the future of the industry is fine as the main companies that produce most of the content will continue to make millions as they have in the past demonstrating that the issue of copyright infringement hasn't significantly affected their profits.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Feb 26 2010 : 2:08PM
No one said they weren't, we just keep saying it is wrong and illegal. I got all the Academy Screeners, I haven't put one up on a site, nor copied one to give my friends.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Feb 26 2010 : 2:16PM
I couldn't put it any better or cleared. You are 100% correct. For him to say that someone is all uppity about product they own, while people are stealing it, is beyond me.
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Feb 26 2010 : 2:40PM
Zaer wrote:That one gets the semantic smoke and mirrors prize so far in this topic, at least from me. Congrats! Potential income is the money you haven't made yet, money you may possibly or probably make in future. I'll tell you what. You refuse all of your income that is, at this momentpotential and let me know what's happened to your bank balance in a month. The difference between potential and actual income is about time. Actual income is money that IS BEING or HAS BEEN made, potential income WILL or MIGHT be made. To steal ACTUAL income from porn producers would involve embezzling or robbing him or intercepting his invoice payments from distributors, etc. Actually, insofar that lowered sales require a producer to spend more of his accumulated profits to pay permanent employees, rent of facilities, actors' fees etc. a downloader of pirated material IS stealing actual income as certainly as any embezzler or armed robber would. It would be a real hoot to see any of the piracy apologists in this thread try to run a business using the definitions of profit, loss, and acceptable business practice that they've conjured to excuse piracy. Id be astonished if ANY of them didn't lose their shirts inside of a month. edited because I don't type for shit! Edited by - duefuss on 2/26/2010 2:43:37 PM
That's great, but you weren't the person I was responding to, and the issue wasn't even raised in reference to your personal habits anyway, but those of the people you're sending screeners out to. Anyway, the person I did respond to stated "This practice does not encourage piracy in the least" and that's categorically false considering mainstream screeners being sent out has been fuelling piracy for years, and in a rather high-profile way. If you think none of your screeners - whether Vivid now or the other companies you worked for previously - have ever ended up as the source of pirating, you're in all likelihood sadly mistaken. Why do so many people with strong anti-piracy opinions come off as so uninformed about the things they're against? I understand where you're coming from and why you're saying the things you say, but frequently it's like reading one of those "DVD or internet?" threads where the DVD fans act like it's still 2006 and "DVD is much better because the video quality is so bad on internet scenes". As long as that side is (either ignorantly or willfully) misunderstanding the nature of the threat, all the "why oh why won't people recognize what's right and wrong?" laments will continue to come across as Quixotic more than anything else.
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Feb 26 2010 : 3:17PM
Go to a good library and read about the history of cinema, and how Hollywood was founded. Obviously you don't know since you are puzzled by my comments. There was out out and out infrigement of patented moviemaking equipment. The same majors who did that years ago are now crying that people are stealing from them. Life of copyright was 13, then double that, then double that. Then a few years ago poor old Disney who build their empire on fairy tales and classics was weepingbecause they would have lost Mickey, and got the copyright extended. Before you comment, investigate further without shooting from the hip. There is always a price for every advancement in technology. Shoplifting has not stopped since stores opened for business, because they have put all those security systems (cameras, guards, metal detectors). Walmart is not going to close because a few people visit their stores and decide to steal a few items now and then. And who knows what theft occurs internally? The point I was trying to make is, the wider your market for a particular product (especially if it not of physical type) the greater possibility it will be intercepted/copied/transformed. I am not saying it is acceptable, but that is the reality of the worldmarket anbd the power of the internet. And like I said in previous posts,porn is a different beast. You cannot get it at Blockbuster. I don't think you can get at Netflix either. If you live in the US and like movies with golden showers/scat, fisting and what have you you cannot get it locally either.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Feb 26 2010 : 4:06PM
I can give you one better, I found people I send screeners to selling them on ebay and back to stores, forget uploading them. Sorry if my what's right and what's wrong laments are impractical, but that is the basic distinction that makes us do what we do. I really don't think it is Quixotic. I have done many wrong things in my life, but i have learned over the years that they are wrong, and my actions have consequences. That is why i choose to do the right thing. I know it is so easy to say, and much harder to do, but for me, and others I know who practice the same way, it is a better path to follow for me. I understand why people steal, I just don't agree with it, and I don't think there are any good reasons for it. But I can't get it where i live, but it is out of print, but my friends do it more than i do, but the companies make millions of dollars, it won't hurt them. Everything after "but", is bullshit. Edited by - hollywood woody on 2/26/2010 4:14:11 PM
Adapt or die! If you put out good product, your fans will support you! Build a better mousetrap! But the company behind the tubes/torrents builds theirs using your wood, metal springs, and cheese. I smell a rat.
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Feb 26 2010 : 4:32PM
I see. People steal porn so stealing porn isn't stealing, is that it? I've been to a good library, thanks. Happily, I even HAVE a pretty fair one myself. Thanks for the history of copyright: nicely done, if unnecessaery and a little off topic. As to the patent infringement you spoke of, there's nothing new to me there, except citing it as proof that "Moviemaking/Hollywood was built on copyright and patent infringements." No one suggested there weren't questionable business practices in movies or any other business for that matter, but that's hardly cause for saying the whole industry is based on theft. You might as well say that the telephone industry was built the same way, or electric utilities. All and many more involved patent fights and shady dealings at their inception. Argue that if you're ever sued for not paying your phone bill or the electric bill. See how that goes. And if these industries and more WERE 'built on coptright and patent infringement, how in HELL can one crime justify committing another? How does what Laemle or Cohen or Mayer or the Warners did in the 1900s entitle you to steal from John Stagliano or Wicked Pictures? And Lord Almighty, SO WHAT if Blockbuster doesn't sell porn? We ARE talking about the internet (and ON the internet, so I'm gonna assume, here, that you have access to it). Whatever your tastes, if you want it, you can get it there, just as the rest of us do: you can steal it or you can PAY FOR it. And a lot of it is better (or worse) than anything on DVD. But if you choose to steal it, that's what it is -- stealing. If you wanna come on here and believe you can convince otherwise anyone but people already like you who don't want to admit they're thieves, fine, but you are only fooling yourselves and maybe insulting the imtelligence of the rest of us.
Click to expand
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Feb 26 2010 : 6:29PM
I am not trying to justy anything at all. No illegal act justifies another no matter how far the road other events occurred. The point is, the people who get on the pulpit and make they are lily white and try to teach and impart moral lessons on others should examine their own industry and how it got there. The movie industry today would not be the same if others before you were not such a rotten bunch of thieves who infringed on the patents of others. And Bell did NOT invent the telephone either, but I pay the phone bill like everybody else. Like I said, shoplifting and internal theft occurs everyday of the week in large and small stores all over the world. These stores don't stop doing business because of that, and no matter what security measures they have devised, human beings will take their chances for such misdeeds. You incorrectly assume that if I download a 13 minute scene between actress A and actor B I am depriving you of $X of profit. You also assume that I would have paid for the scene, if it there was no other legitimate way for me to see it. You paint every activy as being illegal as if I am watching something I did not directly pay for it. Example 1: On a movie channel this week they will broadcast two STAR TREK movies. I record them off the air on a DVD and put them in my movie library. Have I committed a crime? If I did not watch or record them, they would still be broadcast. Example 2: On a tube site I watch a 13 minute scene of a porn movie. I watch it, thinking nothing of it and go back to may daily routine. Even if the scene was available for legit download on the proucer's web site or on a DVD, I definitely would not spend the money to see it. Did I commit a crime? If there was a way for me to download the scene and burn it on a DVD, are the circumstances any different? If that same scene would be available for downlood through a Rapidshare,etc and I downloaded and watched it, did I actually deprive the producer of real money/profits?
s
Edited by - Len801 on 2/26/2010 7:13:12 PM
[Link]
Zaer Deactivated User
249 Posts 10/07
Posted - Feb 26 2010 : 6:31PM
To prove that actual income is being lost one would have to find out from the downloaders if they downloaded the content because it was merely freely available or because they were going to purchase the content but decided not to because the content was available for free. If it's the former case then the content producers don't have a case, if it's the latter case then it's still copyright infringement not the deprivation of property as the content producers aren't deprived of actual property. Which these content producers know but insist on stating otherwise.
Lesbian House Hunters 3 - review by Danielmayu33216
Posted - Feb 24 2010 : 1:44PM
