Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Greenbelt, MD 08/22

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Legal Briefs

View
34 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

34. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 22, 2012, 07:04 Ant
 
Creston wrote on Jan 20, 2012, 14:37:
avianflu wrote on Jan 20, 2012, 13:21:
indeed the most interesting thing about the story is that the USA movie and music industry was able to get this guy busted all the way in New Zealand. There's not many locations more remote from the USA than New Zealand and a whole lot of money on lawyers must have been spent to make the arrest actually happen.

Not really. NZ has an extradition treaty with the US, so it's a few sheets of paperwork that get faxed over and voila.

Note to pirates: If you don't want the US to arrest your ass, hide in Switzerland. Like child-rapist Roman Polanski.

Creston
Or get off Earth.
 
Avatar 1957
 
Ant @ The Ant Farm: http://antfarm.ma.cx and Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net ...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 21, 2012, 13:46 dubfanatic
 
Oh, East Saint Louis, when will you stop being the butt of jokes?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 21, 2012, 12:31 ASeven
 
http://youtu.be/9h2dF-IsH0I

That link pretty much explains everything about why the laws are getting shittier when it concerns copyright.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 21, 2012, 12:09 Creston
 
zirik wrote on Jan 21, 2012, 01:49:
Creston wrote on Jan 20, 2012, 23:27:
Well...

1) Jailbreaking was ruled to be legal. So I'm not sure why a video teaching you how to jailbreak would somehow violate anything, much less

2) actually be copyright infringement. Unless Apple somehow trademarked the entire act of jailbreaking.

I'm not sure what provision you want Youtube to be punished with? Under SOPA this would undoubtedly be illegal (as would reading an email with the word apple in it, most likely), but under the DMCA, there is no infringement in such a video. It's an instructional video and falls (justifiably) under the First Amendment.

Creston

well... maybe the videos are deemed legal but the links posted along with them that gives you all the tools and files needed to do the jailbreaking/modding is illegal. and after you jailbreak your device there are also videos showing off the result complete with download links for the games being played. dont tell me those are covered by the safe harbor status.

No, it isn't. You're thinking of SOPA. It would have been illegal under SOPA. Under the DMCA, linking to something is not illegal. That's why there's a large outcry of all these websites being shut down for linking to shit, because it's done without any legal justification. Congress is trying to enact laws after the fact.

And I'm sorry, but do you really think that Youtube has people sitting there checking every single link / video to see if it might be infringing? 50.000 views? That literally wouldn't even crack the top million favorite videos.

According to Youtube's FAQ "48 hours of video are uploaded every minute, resulting in nearly 8 years of content uploaded every day"

Let's say that every video upload is the maximum 15 minute length, that means that every minute 192 videos are uploaded, which is 11520 videos per hour, and over a quarter of a million videos PER DAY.

Even if Youtube employed ten thousand people for the specific purpose of checking every link, they still couldn't keep up. And obviously they don't.

So no, your "Of course Youtube knows about their deliberate infringement!" theory doesn't hold water. Unless the Feds produce emails and chat logs that impugn Youtube employees discussing copyrighted works on their own site (as in the case of Megaupload), there simply is no comparison.

Which is exactly how it should be. You seem to think SOPA-like rules would be a great idea...?

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 21, 2012, 10:26 zirik
 
Crustacean Soup wrote on Jan 21, 2012, 03:53:
If there are links to places to illegally download games, that would be prohibited under SOPA, but I'm not positive whether the DMCA would cover it (can't recall, too lazy to reread the law at this hour). If it does, it needs a takedown notice for anything to happen.

The idea was that MU was informed about infringing material but did not take it down. If Youtube hasn't been informed of an infringement, there's no problem. That's what the whole DMCA safe harbor thing is about. Youtube is allowed to stay up, even if they might potentially have infringing material, so long as they don't know about it and remove it when they're asked.

DMCA took down popular sites that used to link to ROM files. so youtube links should be covered as well. and the idea that youtube is not aware of two year old videos that get over 50,000 views is laughable. the sites that people link to youtube how-to jailbreak/mod videos for consoles is the perfect starting point for anyone who want to find warez. one of the main problem with the megaupload case is that the DOJ claims they did not provide a useful search feature to find illegal content so that copyright holders can request their removal. youtube does the same by not tagging warez links on their site. its not like they are exempt from being web crawled by google. they own youtube. DMCA is simply not being enforced in a fair manner.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 21, 2012, 03:53 Crustacean Soup
 
zirik wrote on Jan 21, 2012, 01:49:
Creston wrote on Jan 20, 2012, 23:27:
Well...

1) Jailbreaking was ruled to be legal. So I'm not sure why a video teaching you how to jailbreak would somehow violate anything, much less

2) actually be copyright infringement. Unless Apple somehow trademarked the entire act of jailbreaking.

I'm not sure what provision you want Youtube to be punished with? Under SOPA this would undoubtedly be illegal (as would reading an email with the word apple in it, most likely), but under the DMCA, there is no infringement in such a video. It's an instructional video and falls (justifiably) under the First Amendment.

Creston

well... maybe the videos are deemed legal but the links posted along with them that gives you all the tools and files needed to do the jailbreaking/modding is illegal. and after you jailbreak your device there are also videos showing off the result complete with download links for the games being played. dont tell me those are covered by the safe harbor status.

Why wouldn't the tools be legal? Jailbreaking has a DMCA exemption, the tools are used for jailbreaking, so they're covered by the exemption.

If there are links to places to illegally download games, that would be prohibited under SOPA, but I'm not positive whether the DMCA would cover it (can't recall, too lazy to reread the law at this hour). If it does, it needs a takedown notice for anything to happen.

The idea was that MU was informed about infringing material but did not take it down. If Youtube hasn't been informed of an infringement, there's no problem. That's what the whole DMCA safe harbor thing is about. Youtube is allowed to stay up, even if they might potentially have infringing material, so long as they don't know about it and remove it when they're asked.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 21, 2012, 01:49 zirik
 
Creston wrote on Jan 20, 2012, 23:27:
Well...

1) Jailbreaking was ruled to be legal. So I'm not sure why a video teaching you how to jailbreak would somehow violate anything, much less

2) actually be copyright infringement. Unless Apple somehow trademarked the entire act of jailbreaking.

I'm not sure what provision you want Youtube to be punished with? Under SOPA this would undoubtedly be illegal (as would reading an email with the word apple in it, most likely), but under the DMCA, there is no infringement in such a video. It's an instructional video and falls (justifiably) under the First Amendment.

Creston

well... maybe the videos are deemed legal but the links posted along with them that gives you all the tools and files needed to do the jailbreaking/modding is illegal. and after you jailbreak your device there are also videos showing off the result complete with download links for the games being played. dont tell me those are covered by the safe harbor status.

This comment was edited on Jan 21, 2012, 01:58.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: Megaupload Jan 21, 2012, 00:22 Warrax
 
jdreyer wrote on Jan 20, 2012, 15:44:
Are there any alternatives?

Not sure if serious...there is many file sharing sites like Mediafire, Hotfile and Rapidshare to name a few. It's just that Megaupload was pretty much the best of them if you were a member without paying a subscription.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 20, 2012, 23:27 Creston
 
zirik wrote on Jan 20, 2012, 18:55:
…they are willfully infringing copyrights themselves on these systems; have actual knowledge that the materials on their systems are infringing (or alternatively know facts or circumstances that would make infringing material apparent); receive a financial benefit directly attributable to copyright-infringing activity where the provider can control that activity; and have not removed, or disabled access to, known copyright infringing material from servers they control.

thats what took down megaupload. youtube has copyright infringing videos that teach consumers how to jailbreak iphones and consoles. complete with download links. and youtube serves ads that make them money. some videos have been around for at least a couple of years. yet youtube gets safe harbor status.

Well...

1) Jailbreaking was ruled to be legal. So I'm not sure why a video teaching you how to jailbreak would somehow violate anything, much less

2) actually be copyright infringement. Unless Apple somehow trademarked the entire act of jailbreaking.

I'm not sure what provision you want Youtube to be punished with? Under SOPA this would undoubtedly be illegal (as would reading an email with the word apple in it, most likely), but under the DMCA, there is no infringement in such a video. It's an instructional video and falls (justifiably) under the First Amendment.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 20, 2012, 21:39 Kosumo
 
Two words for you Mashiki Amiketo - "Breakfast Tea" Aww  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 20, 2012, 21:38 ASeven
 
TO the two replies below, Hot Coffee actually goes way, way beyond the scope of that case and documents corporate influence in lawmaking today. The McDonalds case is only to kickstart. BTW, apparently the lawsuit being frivolous was pure corporate propaganda. The old lady actually held the cup of coffee which kinda exploded to her lap due to its high temperature, hence 3rd degree burns that required skincraft.

Either way do watch the documentary, the McDonalds case is only used for the first 10 minutes for the doc to delve into far more nefarious affairs happening in US lawmaking.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 20, 2012, 21:21 Mashiki Amiketo
 
ASeven wrote on Jan 20, 2012, 20:21:
A recommendation: watch HBO's documentary Hot Coffee.
Nah, I can tell what it'll be about though. But obviously with cases like these, men everywhere need to go out buy a cup of hot coffee, then try to fuck it. Because it's warm, and it says doesn't explicitly say "do not fuck" on the side of it, we should do it.

Million dollar law suit right there.
 
--
"For every human problem,
there is a neat, simple solution;
and it is always wrong."
--H.L. Mencken
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 20, 2012, 20:42 Prez
 
A recommendation: watch HBO's documentary Hot Coffee.

This is off topic, but even in light of the severity of the woman's burns and the details of McD's practices (which I learned about a long time ago), I still see the hot coffee lawsuit as frivolous. No one made the woman put the cofee cup between her legs. That's just stupid. Most cars have built in cupholders and even then thereare cheap ones sold in Walmart for the few that lack them. Frankly, it's her own fault for doing something dumb. If it had been her own cofee that she spilled on herself, who would she have sued when she spilled it on herself? The cofee maker company?

I never saw the documentary, so I can't comment on the other 3 cases it covers.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 20, 2012, 20:21 ASeven
 
Prez wrote on Jan 20, 2012, 20:02:
As I said in the previous (and outdated) thread on the subject, that Megaupload was involved in conspicuous aiding of copyright infringement is not legal grounds for the Fed to ignore the Constitutional mandate for due process. There are clear legal guidelines in such cases that the Fed is required to follow, regardless of what you think of Megaupload. Tomorrow it may be a website you care about. The Constitution is a thin enough shield against tyranny as it is; we don't need the Fed weakening it further by ignoring it.

A recommendation: watch HBO's documentary Hot Coffee.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: Megaupload Jan 20, 2012, 20:09 Golwar
 
jdreyer wrote on Jan 20, 2012, 15:44:
This is very frustrating. I took some video of my friend's kid the other day, and was getting ready to upload to megaupload so she could download it. Are there any alternatives? Otherwise I will have to pop it in a flash drive and hand deliver it. What a hassle.

I've used this service many times over the years, always for legitimate purposes, as I have friends and relatives all over the world that I like to share large files with. It has been very convenient.

Thanks for inconveniencing us MPAA/US Justice dept.

Oh please, taking down Megaupload changed absolutely nothing to the worse for normal users (and neither for pirates).

If you seriously don't know any alternatives:
http://www.multiupload.com/
http://uploadmirrors.com/

Those services even mirror your uploads, just in case that justice should strike one of them.
 
Avatar 55169
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 20, 2012, 20:02 Prez
 
As I said in the previous (and outdated) thread on the subject, that Megaupload was involved in conspicuous aiding of copyright infringement is not legal grounds for the Fed to ignore the Constitutional mandate for due process. There are clear legal guidelines in such cases that the Fed is required to follow, regardless of what you think of Megaupload. Tomorrow it may be a website you care about. The Constitution is a thin enough shield against tyranny as it is; we don't need the Fed weakening it further by ignoring it.  
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 20, 2012, 18:55 zirik
 
…they are willfully infringing copyrights themselves on these systems; have actual knowledge that the materials on their systems are infringing (or alternatively know facts or circumstances that would make infringing material apparent); receive a financial benefit directly attributable to copyright-infringing activity where the provider can control that activity; and have not removed, or disabled access to, known copyright infringing material from servers they control.

thats what took down megaupload. youtube has copyright infringing videos that teach consumers how to jailbreak iphones and consoles. complete with download links. and youtube serves ads that make them money. some videos have been around for at least a couple of years. yet youtube gets safe harbor status.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 20, 2012, 18:24 Kosumo
 
It's Megabullshit, where is Penn & Teller?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 20, 2012, 17:25 ASeven
 
And suddenly the Megaupload case is not as clearcut as some painted it to be.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 20, 2012, 16:01 PHJF
 
This isn't the right thread at all

This comment was edited on Jan 20, 2012, 16:58.
 
Avatar 17251
 
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
34 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo