Guest DMF Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Seems my New FTP for SPV users got its topic banned by the admins here..... didnt seem to matter to them that any file can be swapped, be it movie or otherwise, although the intent was to share movie files. I ask..... if its ok to delete a post offering a free service to uers, whatever the material, and have it deleted based on what i presume is a copyright thing.... the i ask the admins to please explain why these are acceptable ? A Copyright Image of angalina Jolie Oh, Illegal use of the Microsoft "look" isnt this breaching intelectual property ? plagerism ? I mean, Longhorn is out yet ... OR IS IT :( I wonder what Mr Groning would make of this - use of his COPYRIGHT images.... BUT WAIT - THERES MORE !!!! I refer to post: http://smartphone.modaco.com/viewtopic.php?t=101897 Eve of War - Hmmm ... Jeff Wayne Copyright - yes ? Eye of the Tiger - Survivor - Copyrighted ? I THINK SO !! The Final Coundown - Europe - Yup ..... Copyrighted Homer Berr - SIMPSONS AGAIN !! - Yup, Copyrighted sounds the show Star Wars - Lets all rip off George Lucas !! Come On Admins - youve opened the door, dont delete this post ..... answer it. Why is it ok to VIOLATE COPYRIGHTS as above, and have them linked HERE ON YOUR FORUM, but NOT to tell ppl about a free service which simply allows them to swap files ? I await your cleverly worded reply :lol: - lots of ppl are here watching.... deleting it simply means you accept you are hypocrites PUBLICLY .... stuck between a rock and a hard place so to speak. Topic of the month m8, wheeze of the week.... Off ya go :D Justify one breach of copyright and not the other, Copyright is a simple YES WE ALLOW IT or NO WE DONT, if you dont, then by your own rules you have to remove aLL copyrighted stuff from your forum yes ? If you do, then i can post my ftp details, yes ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest midnight Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 i cant beleive you are seriously comparing the trading of FULL movies to that of 30 second wav files and a couple of images it was me who deleted your post oh, and dont think you've got away with that post lightly either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMF Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 1 second, 100 seconds 100 million seconds - copyright IS copyright - yes ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest midnight Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 theres a HUGE difference between whats accepted and what is blatent theft no-one is gonna get arrested for using an image of angelina jolie unless its used without permission and being sold/used in company advertising etc (hell, it may even increase sales of the film), or get arrested for using a 30 second sound clip (i beleive it has actually become law that 10% or 30 seconds, whichever is smaller, of a full music track is allowed to be spread as this does not have an impact in sales, and actually increases the possibility of someone buying the full song) but trading full films, that will get you into serious trouble with FACT, even imprisonment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blowdart Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 As someone who spends his day dealing with record labels, 30 seconds clips are pretty much free, if used for "promoitional purposes". Broadcast 31 seconds and you pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMF Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Youre creating a grey area where there isnt one..... are the images copyright, yes or no ? - Are the sound samples copyright yes or no ? Youre right about the 30 seconds, but legally A) if you OWN the recoed in question, and :lol: for use in professional tracks where permission is granted and where the copyright holder recieves some royalties or payment for use. I refer: The LAW: http://www.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2003/20032498.htm Do you think it is acceptable to spread LONGHORN theme without A) Microsofts permission to use the name/trademark or :D its ability to reep profits from the use of said trademark ? Im almost certain Microsoft would agree with me on that score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMF Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 please define promotiional, surely that doesnt imply its ok to spread said 30 seconds to the public without written authorisation ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMF Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 So again i ask for justification..... Is copyright theft ok on MDoCo in ANY form, image, sound or movie/trailer. even the information which to all intents describes in detai in some threads how to rip DVds and convert them to Avi/DivX and crop resize etc..... isnt this incitement to break the law ? Isnt this putting the public into a position where they can be held liable in court ? Some1 has a lot of deleting to do i think..... or reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest midnight Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 i think you'll find its called a 'fair use' policy, it does not damage the respective companies in any way, whereas distribution of films costs the film companies millions every year. i ask you, how does the use of images on a homescreen cost anyone money? in fact, it could even be argued as free publicity. simple though, we make the rules, you obey them, if you dont like it find another forum to post your warez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest kurtfhouse Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 DMF, you have to keep in mind that its the site owner, ie Paul, who gets threatened with legal action for allowing that kind of thing to be posted on his site NOT YOU :lol: , so its really up to him and his moderators what they are prepared to allow on the site. Believe me, I have been a member of more than one forum, back when I had a Nokia :roll: 7650 that had things posted they shouldn't but they were forced to change there ways when legal action loomed. Midnight has done the right thing. At the end of the day we all have access to search engines and if we want to find that kind of thing we can do it in our own time away from MoDaCo. I appreciate you were only trying to help people but just go with what the mods say :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mattat Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Also in order to breach copyright, you have to have taken a substantial part of the copyright work - so no taking 1 second of a piece of music might not break copyright, whereas taking 100secs of a work would be much more likely to. Trading entire films is clearly a breach of copyright and is actively policed by organisations such as FACT, whereas homescreens and the like are often accepted by the copyright holder because they are not decreasing revenue and so the holder does not insist on a strict enforcement of their rights. For example you cannot claim that the homescreen of Futurama is in any way going to reduce the people who pay money to watch episodes on say a DVD. Even with ringtones, people are not going to download a 30 second ringtone instead of buying the song. It would be different in Matt Groening decided to get into the business of selling homescreens based on Futurama, because then the homemade version would clearly be harmful. Obviously with full movies then people are going to download them for free instead of watching them on DVD, video or going to the cinema. If the moderators don't take a firm stance with 'services' like yours DMF then the future of this sight as a respected resource will be in question and we will all suffer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blowdart Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 please define promotiional, surely that doesnt imply its ok to spread said 30 seconds to the public without written authorisation ? It depends. Any use of a sound recording, however short, without the consent of the copyright owners is normally a breach of the law. Ringtone companies have to license their ringtones. Of course for myself I feel you should be severly slapped around for your bloody stupid signature which attempts HTML entities and fails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest midnight Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 So again i ask for justification..... Is copyright theft ok on MDoCo in ANY form, image, sound or movie/trailer. even the information which to all intents describes in detai in some threads how to rip DVds and convert them to Avi/DivX and crop resize etc..... isnt this incitement to break the law ? Isnt this putting the public into a position where they can be held liable in court ? Some1 has a lot of deleting to do i think..... or reading. movie trailers are spread as it aids the promotion of films. Ripping DVD's is legal for your own use (so long as you have the original DVD and do not show it as a public broadcast) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blowdart Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Ripping DVD's is legal for your own use (so long as you have the original DVD and do not show it as a public broadcast) Actually want to bet on that one? It's not a breach of copyright, but I believe bypassing the encryption scheme is now under rather stupid new EU regs. When we get DVDs sent to us at work we force the sender (usually the studio) to sign a "We have permission to bypass DECSS for this one disk". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mattat Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Anyway the real point is as Kurtfhouse says - it's Paul and his hosts who will get in trouble if FACT comes knocking, and while they will come and take action against sites linking to illegal movies, they will almost certainly not take action against homescreens and the like. So this is Paul's board, and he put the moderators in charge. What they say goes - this isn't a public institution and so does not have to obey the right to free speech. Either accept the situation or find another board that more suits your purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest midnight Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 well, for a start, i suppose that depends what you are ripping then, in some cases you have a legal right to rip it as you mentioned above :lol: the argument could then sway towards all divx players should be illegal cos 99% of divx's are copied films :D so the basic act of ripping a dvd may not be illegal, in which case there is nothing wrong with having a dvd rip guide (when it was first posted i did wonder on the legalities of it to be honest, but the 'backup' purpose, while not completely legit is accepted in the whole) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMF Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Midnight, are you saying that swapping SPV formatted movies takes money away from the distribution companies and stuios ? how so - they dont sell SPV formatted films as far as i know. Kurtfhouse, youre 100% right - it is Paul who has to answer. so it wouldnt be a problem then to point some of the owning companies at this thread.... if that makes you at all nervous, then there is breach going on. Matat - youre also right, ppl dont sell homescreens as such (appart from those ebay scumballs who profit from it daily) so theres no loss of revenue - i refer that point back on the SPv fomated movies. I dont think you can fairly compare watching a movie on an SPV to watching it on the cinema or a dvd, if you like what you see on an SPV, i think youre more likly to rent or view the full quality item in its respective viewing recepticle :lol: And yes, we would all suffer if i were to prove my point, which is why ur all on the defence, i understand that - again though, it doesnt remove the issue of copyright - either it exists or it doesnt. html ? theres no html in my sig ... never has been ? To quote blowdart: Any use of a sound recording, however short, without the consent of the copyright owners is normally a breach of the law. Ringtone companies have to license their ringtones. - Normally ? so are you saying that the recordings in the thead mentioned above IS BREAKING THE LAW ? If so - then it must be deleted yes ? Your rules not mine...... I just run webservers and ftp services :D Hey if theres any Mirc server admins here, maybe they should watch out too :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMF Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 but the 'backup' purpose, while not completely legit is accepted in the whole- but they are changing that low so that you cannot make backup copies, even if you own the original - so what then for the guides ? the basic act of ripping a dvd may not be illegal - im pretty sure it is - oh yes yes yes (cuenodding dog from the un-named car insurance firm) :lol: I think the uk is becoming way too politically correct and way too jumpy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest kurtfhouse Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Here here Mattat! There is no more that needs to be said :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mattat Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 While I accept that there is no commercial market in SPV formatted movies, it can be said that some people will watch a film on their SPV and not bother to rent it. While you personally may not, I am certain that some people would and that this would divert income. Noone is going to get a futurama homescreen instead of watching an episode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blowdart Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Midnight, are you saying that swapping SPV formatted movies takes money away from the distribution companies and stuios ? how so - they dont sell SPV formatted films as far as i know.They don't sell DIVS formatted films either, that still doesn't make it right. so theres no loss of revenue - i refer that point back on the SPv fomated movies. I dont think you can fairly compare watching a movie on an SPV to watching it on the cinema or a dvd, if you like what you see on an SPV, i think youre more likly to rent or view the full quality item in its respective viewing recepticle :lol: I do not believe there is a "loss of revenue" excuse in EU copyright law. html ? theres no html in my sig ... never has been ?What's all the ≈ entities then? - Normally ? so are you saying that the recordings in the thead mentioned above IS BREAKING THE LAW ? In theory yes. Liklihood of prosecution is something else. If so - then it must be deleted yes ? No. Depends on the wishes of the forum owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMF Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Then why have a ppocket movie program ? just for trailers ? - do we accept that SPV is "almost" a pc (pocket pc), do we watch films in our little bundle of circuits ? do we download and watch divx ..... WE ALL DO :lol: So - we return to Justify - is copyright breach accepted on MoDoCo, yes or No - this still hasnt been answerd plainly, but with the flair of a politician, skirting the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest blowdart Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 Then why have a ppocket movie program ? just for trailers ? - do we accept that SPV is "almost" a pc (pocket pc), do we watch films in our little bundle of circuits ? do we download and watch divx ..... WE ALL DO :lol: All? Sorry, never have done. Same with music. So don't try to tar us all with your brush. Of course you haven't thought that are are legal, free, video downloads out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest midnight Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 errr, it isnt illegal to rip dvd's cos you may be ripping an uncopyrighted dvd, simple as that the guide does not tell you how to rip copyrighted films, and so the author cannot get in trouble for it, why do you think these dvd software companies dont get sued? because they do not make the software to be used for illegal purposes, if the user wishes to do so, on their head be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DMF Posted January 19, 2004 Report Share Posted January 19, 2004 "In theory yes" - back to theories..... Copyright - Yes or No ? ≈ - hahaha install the verdana font to find out - its the double ~ character lol ...... like an equals sign but twisted :lol: ALT+ (insert number) gives u these special characters, check out your pc's character map tool :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts