J-Addicts? A site for Japanese Movies

News, Updates and Information about this site.
This section is important, please read it for changes about the site!

Should a site similiar to D-Addicts be created for Japanese Movies?

Poll ended at Jun 21st, '04, 10:30

Yes
131
85%
No
23
15%
 
Total votes: 154

User avatar
maiko303
Posts: 4
Joined: May 24th, '04, 16:22
Location: uk

Post by maiko303 » May 24th, '04, 21:33

Slackey wrote:
maiko303 wrote:@ Beer - I'm not about to quote you and turn this into a messy, hard to read post so here are my responses:

Point 1. But lawsuits generally have to brought up separately. Also, say if I ran a site with blatantly licensed material on (not that j-addicts would be that of course), and was taken to court, why would that affect my other site which was run on a separate server, and *didn't* host such material. Do you think the MPAA /courts would try to shut down my other site just out of spite?
Well, I'm a paranoid person in general when it comes to these types of things I think of the worst as the most possible outcome so that's why I said no. If j-addicts was run, and lets say Ruroshin was sued and had to be brought up on copyright charges, it would most likely lead to the end of d-addicts. How? Well, of course they'll find out that he has another tracker filled with Japanese dramas. People on this board seem to forget that even though the dramas on this site are not licensed in the US, it doesn't mean we aren't violating copyright laws. We are violating Japanese laws. And the TV captures on this site are violating US broadcasting laws. We are all, in theory, bootleggers because of that fact. Copyright laws don't end just because we are in another country. Right now, no company is looking at the dorama community as a ring of bootleggers and they are letting us continue to share with each other. If j-addicts was run , the Japanese companies will see that we cost them business and, maybe in spite because of that fact, will want to exercise there right to shut d-addcits down as well.

You are too naive to think that d-addicts won't be shut down out of spite for what happens on j-addicts. Business is business, and if it means that shutting down both trackers is what it takes to drive the message home, then they will. If the US music industry had the guts to sue a 12 yr. old girl for copyright infringement, what makes you think the MPAA won't try to convince Japanese companies into suing about d-aadicts? Do you actually think they won't try and shut down d-addicts out of spite? Wouldn't you try to shut down both trackers just you can teach some copyright violating punk kid a lesson? (Sorry Ruroshin didn't mean to call you a punk kid! Just trying to drive the message home)

My point is d-addcits isn't under a microscope and we basically have free reign. I think the creation of j-addcits would have changed that and may lead to d-addcits closing. Well it doesn't really matter now anyways since Ruroshin won't be making j-addicts.....

As you say, its looks like j-addicts will be a non-starter now anyway, but I still stand by my original point that the MPAA would not try to bring down a site which hosts Asian dramas just because the owner also happens to run a site with non US licensed Japanese movies. They have enough to be dealing with without wasting time & money on media that's blatantly out of their jurisdiction. I really cant see them wasting time liasing with Japanese companies, trying to get them to bring a lawsuit against d-addicts either. What would be in it for the MPAA? Nothing really, apart from if they think we cant get Asian dramas anymore we will start watching more American shite again.
I think that the only reason Japanese companies would have to get involved is if a large majority of visitors to d-addicts were from Japan. I don't know the geographical statistics for the visitors of this site but I'd be very much surprised if that were the case. Most Japanese people could simply watch there own counties dramas on tv and have no need to dl them in the first place much as I do with coronation street, and Eastenders! Do Japanese tv drama producers really care if a tiny percentage of people who live outside of Japan download their dramas? We cant know the answer for sure but I know what I think :P

As for Asian dramas that *are* shown on American and other countries TV channels, again, this is hardly in the same league as downloading the latest Hollywood Blockbuster. Indeed the BBC has plans to release its *entire* back archive of tv shows on the internet for people to download for free! Hopefully this is a sign of things to come.
Ultimately I wouldn't want anything to happen that would risk d-addicts being shut down either. My fiancée is Japanese and we watch the J-dramas that I dl from this site and others every night. I'm just totally not convinced that having a j-addicts site would in any way put the future of this site at risk. But still, as j-addicts is not happening now that's irrelevant.

@ groink - I would happily set up a tracker and run a website for Japanese movies if I had the technical knowledge and money to do so, but unfortunately I have neither.
It certainly has nothing to do with being scared though. If there was some way someone else could set it all up but have it all in my name and address then I'd have no problem with that at all lol.
I'm not sure why you are saying this anyway as the post was started with Ruroshin asking what people thought about him setting up j-addicts. People are just giving there opinion on that. In the original post there was no mention of asking *other* people to start up the site....

User avatar
BT-Slut
Posts: 220
Joined: Apr 8th, '04, 09:33
Location: China
Contact:

Post by BT-Slut » May 24th, '04, 22:23

maiko303 wrote:. If there was some way someone else could set it all up but have it all in my name and address then I'd have no problem with that at all lol.
Miako303, that's very interesting you'd offer to do this. There are definitely people in this "scene" who would take you up on that offer. The person who owns and runs www.acfmovies.com would gladly take up your offer.

I was initially going to suggest exactly this. But I didn't think you'd actually agree to this. I don't believe you've thought through this completely. All legal liablities would lie with you then. If you PMed Ruroshin with this offer, I believe he'd accept it as well.

jholic
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 2984
Joined: Feb 3rd, '04, 19:53
Location: missin' hawaii

Post by jholic » May 24th, '04, 23:04

Ruroshin wrote:After taking the advice from friends and people that I trust and opinions that I value here, I have decided not to create j-addicts. I'm sorry if I got any of your hopes up. Instead I will concentrate on improving d-addicts.

I'm sure we'll lose a lot of visitors and contributers to the site without the movies but thanks for all the fish.
hey! i'm glad to hear you say that, Ruroshin. it's not worth the risk to you. and though the idea is great, i'm sure someone else will be willing to implement it (and use Maiko303's name - just joking).

to me, you've made a great contribution to d-addicts, and spreading yourself thin wouldn't help the cause.

speaking of making new sites, i'm surprised someone hasn't spun off of kloofy's idea and created a website for subtitles to asian dramas. since you're only hosting the subs, i don't believe there's any risk involved (legality-wise). and you'd probably get a lot of assistance from people who upload to kloofy's site....

User avatar
groink
Posts: 2039
Joined: Dec 8th, '03, 03:58
Location: Pearl City, Hawaii

Post by groink » May 24th, '04, 23:14

maiko303 wrote:@ groink - I would happily set up a tracker and run a website for Japanese movies if I had the technical knowledge and money to do so, but unfortunately I have neither.
Well, Ruroshin isn't that rich either. A bunch of the users of this site, including yours truly, have donated a chunk of change to help cover all of his expenses. If you're doing all of this for a really good cause, and that you're a very good person have a clean reputation in the community, you'll soon be receiving donations to the point where you won't have to pay a single dime out of your pocket. It's perfectly fine to ask for donations!

I'm very pleased to see you make this kind of an offer. I kept posting those scared message as a way to bully someone into coming out of the woodwork and actually consider running a site his/herself. So if you go through with all of this, you have my 100-percent respect, though I personally won't be visiting the site.

--- groink

User avatar
vibius
Posts: 21
Joined: Feb 14th, '04, 16:06
Location: Directly over the center of the Earth!
Contact:

Post by vibius » May 24th, '04, 23:28

jholic wrote:since you're only hosting the subs, i don't believe there's any risk involved (legality-wise).
Well legally, subtitles are protected by copyright too. And if it's a fansub done without permission, it infringes on the original author's copyright. The risk may be low, but I'm sure it's still illegal, so I don't think it's the case that there isn't any risk.

Ruroshin
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 1174
Joined: Dec 6th, '03, 00:57

Post by Ruroshin » May 24th, '04, 23:31

jholic wrote: speaking of making new sites, i'm surprised someone hasn't spun off of kloofy's idea and created a website for subtitles to asian dramas. since you're only hosting the subs, i don't believe there's any risk involved (legality-wise). and you'd probably get a lot of assistance from people who upload to kloofy's site....
There are reasons why this hasn't happened and why kloofy's site can exist:

1. Movie subtitles can be easily ripped from DVDs. There are waaaaaaay more movie DVD with subtitles than there are drama DVDs with subtitles.

2. More people are willing to fansub movie dvd and release them because they're shorter, only 1.5 to 2 hrs long compare to dramas series which is usually 11x45mins for jdrama, 16x60 mins for kdrama and 40x45 mins for cdrama.

3. Drama fansubbers rarely release their sub files.

4. You can have a look at the subtitle thread, there's not that much there that would warrant a whole site dedicated to collecting drama subtitles.

That being said, if and only if there comes such a time that I receive a lot of drama subtitle files and it becomes too big to manage in a forum topic then I'll setup a site similiar to kloofys. At it is now its not worth it.

User avatar
kie
Posts: 2
Joined: May 3rd, '04, 01:41

Post by kie » May 25th, '04, 07:31

Ruroshin, thanks for the kind words. I'm glad you like the FSS site. It's important that we support each other 8)

Just to clarify things, the FSS site is for all asian media, not kust KMovies. If you look around, you can find JMovies and CMovies. We even have a Sammo Hung fan club :D

User avatar
kie
Posts: 2
Joined: May 3rd, '04, 01:41

Post by kie » May 25th, '04, 07:53

good idea :)
I'd be happy to do the same for you as well

User avatar
maiko303
Posts: 4
Joined: May 24th, '04, 16:22
Location: uk

Post by maiko303 » May 25th, '04, 12:01

@ BT-Slut - I'm already a member of acf, but thats not the kind of site I was talking about. acf has links to all asian media, regardless of whether its licenced in the US. I wouldnt be willing to take responsibility for that because as I said in an earlier post US licenced movies may as well be mainstream hollywood movies as far as the MPAA are concerned.
If anyone sets up a site for Non US licenced Japanese movies then just PM me as my offer to use my name still stands.

User avatar
delsxyz
Posts: 92
Joined: Feb 15th, '04, 07:13
Location: Ad Agency

Post by delsxyz » May 25th, '04, 21:07

Vivious wrote
Well legally, subtitles are protected by copyright too. And if it's a fansub done without permission, it infringes on the original author's copyright.
--------------------------------
Yes, he is correct.

Also, I learned from abmj why Fuji had decided not to air
any more subtitled shows at all in the United States. To make
long story short, at one time, JNP, what was that name who'd been
doing Kiku Stuff?, anyhow, this particular company demanded more
money and copyright on English subtitles, which angered Fuji also
created massive copyright problems in Japan ( Script writer, author
lost copyright in the United States where Kiku registered its work)

jholic
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 2984
Joined: Feb 3rd, '04, 19:53
Location: missin' hawaii

Post by jholic » May 25th, '04, 21:27

vibius, Ruro, delsxyz: thanks for the replies, it's always good to learn more. it brings me to another question.

Ruro mentioned that there were a lot of dvd subs cuz the subs could be ripped from the dvd. but i also see soooo many subs for avi, ogm, mpg files on kloofy's. if you ripped the subs from a dvd, wouldn't some of the timing be off, etc? isn't that why there are five different sub files for a particular movie?

the reason i ask this is cuz i felt that most of those files were being fansubbed and being posted to kloofy's because he provides a forum for it. i also notice there are (and i have friends who do it) tons of fansubs for anime (which often have 80+ eps).

my thought was since there is no real existing forum for posting drama subs, people were not likely to do it. if someone (and i'd be willing to help, but not host) were to make a site for drama subs, more people would be willing to do it and post? no?

User avatar
vibius
Posts: 21
Joined: Feb 14th, '04, 16:06
Location: Directly over the center of the Earth!
Contact:

Post by vibius » May 25th, '04, 21:36

delsxyz wrote:also created massive copyright problems in Japan ( Script writer, author lost copyright in the United States where Kiku registered its work)
I'd be interested in reading more about this if you have a reference because I'm not familiar with many international copyright cases. But it seems to me that article 8 of the Berne Convention would apply here, which would clearly be in favor of the original Japanese author. But anyway, in the US you can't "lose" a copyright, although it is certainly possible for someone to register a copyright for something you own, and then you'll just have to take them to court to reassert your copyright.

User avatar
BT-Slut
Posts: 220
Joined: Apr 8th, '04, 09:33
Location: China
Contact:

Post by BT-Slut » May 25th, '04, 21:44

vibius wrote:
delsxyz wrote:also created massive copyright problems in Japan ( Script writer, author lost copyright in the United States where Kiku registered its work)
I'd be interested in reading more about this if you have a reference because I'm not familiar with many international copyright cases. But it seems to me that article 8 of the Berne Convention would apply here, which would clearly be in favor of the original Japanese author. But anyway, in the US you can't "lose" a copyright, although it is certainly possible for someone to register a copyright for something you own, and then you'll just have to take them to court to reassert your copyright.
I think you're confusing copyright with trademark Vibius. There's no registration process for copyrights. When I take a photo, it's copyrighted to me. when I write an essay, it's copyrighted to me. I don't have to registered with anyone to get copyright for my creations. It is true that if someone uses your creations for profit, you can sue that someone for using your copyrighted works without your permission.

That is why I'm so against the RIAA/MPAA attitudes. They are going after end users who just download to view. We're not profitting from this. If some group is actually selling these divx movies for a profit, then I'm all for the MPAA targeting those groups and prosecuting them. But for individual end users who just download to view or to listen and with no thought of profit whatsoever, I think it should totally fall under fair use. (Yes Vibius, I realized it does NOT fall under fair use currently. I think it should in the future.)

User avatar
groink
Posts: 2039
Joined: Dec 8th, '03, 03:58
Location: Pearl City, Hawaii

Post by groink » May 25th, '04, 22:21

This is what REALLY bugging me...

I've heard a couple of people mention that they believe in the "trial before purchase" theory. Right off the bat, I think that's total bullsh*t!!!!

It's like hanging around the magazine rack... You pick up a magazine, then you browse through it. Whether or not you like the content of the magazine, you DID in fact gather information from that source. There's no way a human being can dump the information from their head. You should in fact pay the publisher for absorbing that information. This is why many bookstores do not like people browsing through magazines (they have signs posted), though personally I don't see them enforcing this rule.

Same thing with a DVD... I see one person in particular encouraging people to download the movie and watch it first. If they don't like it, they can just throw the movie away. If they like it, they can buy it. Is this a load of crap or what??????? This very point is one of the more popular ones among the pro-pirating crowd.

These people keep digging for more stupid and idiotic things to support their cause.

--- groink

krys
Posts: 13
Joined: Jan 13th, '04, 10:16

Post by krys » May 25th, '04, 22:23

jholic wrote:the reason i ask this is cuz i felt that most of those files were being fansubbed and being posted to kloofy's because he provides a forum for it.
No. Those are subtitles ripped from dvds.
i also notice there are (and i have friends who do it) tons of fansubs for anime (which often have 80+ eps).
No. Your friends must rip subtitles from dvds as well. Anime softsubtitles made by fans are scarce.
my thought was since there is no real existing forum for posting drama subs, people were not likely to do it. if someone (and i'd be willing to help, but not host) were to make a site for drama subs, more people would be willing to do it and post? no?
No. Drama softsubtitles made by fans are scarce as well.

krys
Posts: 13
Joined: Jan 13th, '04, 10:16

Post by krys » May 25th, '04, 22:28

My point being, you may create such a site but as much useful it would be, it would never be as rich in stuff as kloofy's, not even a bit.

User avatar
reverend
Posts: 86
Joined: Mar 15th, '04, 23:14
Location: London

Post by reverend » May 25th, '04, 22:31

groink i'm not sure that is a fair argument. If you want to go and read books in Barnes & Noble, you are within your rights to do that surely. The same protocol seems to apply if you go to a CD store and listen to a bunch of albums at a listening post. You 'absorb' the information, but you are not obliged to buy....the problem arises when you obtain a copy of that book/album/movie illegally and without paying.

I think 'fair use' should address your rights over how you use something you have already paid for, but it can't apply to something you downloaded without paying for, at least if the rights holder chooses to enforce their rights over the 'product'. I guess that's the chance we are all taking.

User avatar
vibius
Posts: 21
Joined: Feb 14th, '04, 16:06
Location: Directly over the center of the Earth!
Contact:

Post by vibius » May 25th, '04, 22:32

BT-Slut wrote:I think you're confusing copyright with trademark Vibius.
That's ... unpossible!
There's no registration process for copyrights.
I'm sorry, but you are wrong about that. In the US, you can indeed register a copyright:
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html
(see Why should I register my work if copyright protection is automatic?)
It is true as you say:
When I take a photo, it's copyrighted to me. when I write an essay, it's copyrighted to me. I don't have to registered with anyone to get copyright for my creations.
But the registration process still exists and has a purpose (per above FAQ).
But for individual end users who just download to view or to listen and with no thought of profit whatsoever, I think it should totally fall under fair use. (Yes Vibius, I realized it does NOT fall under fair use currently. I think it should in the future.)
Well, I sympathize with your sentiment. US copyright laws have evolved over the years to support the tyrrany of corporations (originally the were only to protect the original author). However, I don't think it is a good idea to allow the kind of copying you suggest ... maybe at a certain reduced bitrate or something so there is still some incentive to buy the original at a quality bitrate ... but I dunno if that'll ever happen.

I would urge everyone here to learn a little more about copyright by reading the relevant FAQs and US code. It would help dispell some of the misconceptions that pop up now and then.

User avatar
alvy
Posts: 69
Joined: May 25th, '04, 21:26
Location: Tokyo! Yay!

Post by alvy » May 25th, '04, 22:40

Hello everybody,

First, I am new to this forum and I would just like to take the opportunity to send a note of appreciation to everybody involved in running it. You have given me a chance to see many wonderful stories that I would never have even known about without you. Through them, I believe I have also learnt something about Japanese culture (which is my main area of interest). My life is richer for it, so thank you very much.

Secondly, this has been a very interesting and enlightening thread. There are many sides to this file sharing activity that we are all involved in, and many of them have been covered here.

Clearly, we are all thieves, in the sense of the law. TV series and movies are not free, just because they are freely available. There are authors and actors and directors and producers etc. that should be paid for their work. As I am sure many of you do, I have to live with a certain amount of guilt because of it.

Not a very large amount though. Somehow, when it comes to file sharing, there is a wide gap between what is definitely wrong in a legal sense, and what feels wrong morally. I don't feel like a thief when I download jdrama, even though perhaps I should.

Also, there are several positive sides that, while they do not put money in the pockets of the copyright holders, are valuable in their own right. Through downloaded drama and movies there are lots of people like us who have become interested in Japan, South Korea, China etc.

I find myself eating sushi a lot more, cooking dim sum and treating my friends to glutinous rice balls that I can find in a small Asian food store around the corner. I have started reading Japanese authors. There was recently a Hong Kong FIlm Festival here in Stockholm which I of course attended. I am trying to learn Japanese, and I am definitely going to go to Japan as soon as I can scrape together some money.

Maybe the Japanese/Chinese/Korean Ministeries of Culture should actually sponsor distribution of material that hasn't found a commercial base overseas yet? They have lots to gain from it. :roll

The companies involved may have too. Eventually, there might be enough interest in, let's say, Japanese film and culture that we will be able to get a jdrama series on Swedish television. There's never been one that I know of, so far. It is happening right now with manga, which is finally beginning to grow here. Popular manga are now being licensed in Sweden, which enriches their creators. Would it have happened without the subculture that fed on downloaded pirate manga? Maybe, but it would have taken even longer.

Anyway, sorry for the long post. I tend to ramble on sometimes. The J-addict site sounded like a great idea at first, but I don't want to get anyone into legal trouble. A low profile is probably the best choice. As long as we remain a tiny fringe group watching TV series the appeal of which it would be difficult to explain to most of our friends, we might not merit the attention of the producers and distributors. Let's enjoy it while it lasts. :D

User avatar
vibius
Posts: 21
Joined: Feb 14th, '04, 16:06
Location: Directly over the center of the Earth!
Contact:

Post by vibius » May 25th, '04, 23:06

alvy wrote:Clearly, we are all thieves, in the sense of the law.
Well, thievery comes under criminal law, while copyright infringement is (usually) civil law, so there is a technical difference. The RIAA in particular has tried to demonize copyright infringement by conflating it with stealing (and calling it piracy). I think they are a little too full of themselves on that point. They want to believe that every download is a lost sale, but there is significant evidence to the contrary.

User avatar
BT-Slut
Posts: 220
Joined: Apr 8th, '04, 09:33
Location: China
Contact:

Post by BT-Slut » May 25th, '04, 23:11

groink wrote:It's like hanging around the magazine rack... You pick up a magazine, then you browse through it. Whether or not you like the content of the magazine, you DID in fact gather information from that source. There's no way a human being can dump the information from their head. You should in fact pay the publisher for absorbing that information. This is why many bookstores do not like people browsing through magazines (they have signs posted), though personally I don't see them enforcing this rule..

--- groink
You must have limited access to big book stores in the USA. The two largest bookstore chains in the USA--Barnes & Noble and Borders--specifically go out of their way to invite you to stay and linger for hours to browse and read. In my younger days, I worked for Barnes and Noble. It was the explicit policy of B&N to try to incite the customer to stay for as long as possible. There are numerous placement of comfy sofas and chairs spread throughout any B&N. B&N knows through their emperical data collection that allowing people to "test and browse" freely will ultimately bring in more sales than to restrict access to magazines and books. While it certainly is true that some people may use this to their advantage--by going in only to browse and not buy--the vast majority of people offer more money to B&N because of it.

When I purchase books, I always go to B&N because they make the environment so friendly and welcoming.

You may think some of what others say is "bullshit", but I get the same "bullshit" impression from much of what you say as well.

User avatar
BT-Slut
Posts: 220
Joined: Apr 8th, '04, 09:33
Location: China
Contact:

Post by BT-Slut » May 25th, '04, 23:34

vibius wrote:[But the registration process still exists and has a purpose (per above FAQ).


I would urge everyone here to learn a little more about copyright by reading the relevant FAQs and US code. It would help dispell some of the misconceptions that pop up now and then.
Good post. I knew about a registration process but I remembered it wasn't mandatory. But it's good you pointed out the FAQ. It's interesting to know when it is required to register.

Also, I want to pass along these following sites for everyone to read. It's extremely insightful and enlightening. Know the law and know your rights to defend against any "DMCA takedown" letters.
http://chillingeffects.org/
A joint project of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, University of San Francisco, and University of Maine law school clinics.
http://www.eff.org/

Who We Are

Based in San Francisco, EFF is a donor-supported membership organization working to protect our fundamental rights regardless of technology; to educate the press, policymakers and the general public about civil liberties issues related to technology; and to act as a defender of those liberties. Among our various activities, EFF opposes misguided legislation, initiates and defends court cases preserving individuals' rights, launches global public campaigns, introduces leading edge proposals and papers, hosts frequent educational events, engages the press regularly, and publishes a comprehensive archive of digital civil liberties information at one of the most linked-to websites in the world: http://www.eff.org.

User avatar
delsxyz
Posts: 92
Joined: Feb 15th, '04, 07:13
Location: Ad Agency

Circle (c) and copyrighted

Post by delsxyz » May 26th, '04, 00:56

FACT
You pay US$ 30.00 if my memory is correct and submit
your work to the copyright office/Library of Congress. There is a waiting periiod for examination, but virtually you'll receive a copyright.
Then, officially you can print (c) --read it as Circle C.
Your handwriting on memo pad, your picture, you can say
you have a copyright. That's what broadterm of copyright is
all about. However, you cannot put (c) on your work unless you
get copyright from the above $30.00 process.


---My guess is ...
If JP Productions had paid $ 30.00 for one drama, it owns copyright
on the show . The only way for Fuji to fight is to bring a law suit
against JP Productions. Not worthwhile I guess for many dramas.
I think that's why Fuji decided not to air subtitled shows in the USA.
Bad business practice to demand more money for subtitles,
and JP Productions also was a buyer to Fuji for Kiku programmings.
I buy more...offer us better deal.
I own the copyright of the drama. I should get more cut from Kiku.
And I run Kiku.
No wonder Kiku said goodbye to JP Productions.

User avatar
vibius
Posts: 21
Joined: Feb 14th, '04, 16:06
Location: Directly over the center of the Earth!
Contact:

Re: Circle (c) and copyrighted

Post by vibius » May 26th, '04, 01:16

delsxyz wrote:However, you cannot put (c) on your work unless you get copyright from the above $30.00 process.
Could you provide a citation for this last sentence? I believe it is not true. In the US, since 1978, a work is copyrighted as soon as it is fixed in a tangible form. The copyright notice is actually optional since 1978, although one copyright FAQ I read indicates that if it is present, you may be able to get higher damages in the case of infringement. There is no fee for adding a copyright notice AFAIK, the $30 is solely for registration with the copyright office:
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-register.html
No wonder Kiku said goodbye to JP Productions.
It's an interesting story. I'd like to read more about it if you know of a source or link, thanks.

User avatar
delsxyz
Posts: 92
Joined: Feb 15th, '04, 07:13
Location: Ad Agency

Fuji's current answer

Post by delsxyz » May 26th, '04, 01:16

http://www.fujisankei.com

Why doesn't FCI broadcast more Japanese programming with English subtitles?

FCI acquires the right to air entertainment TV programs in Japanese only.
================================================
番組・編成について
番組で英語字幕の表示はないのですか?

現時点で、FCI , フジテレビ、および各権利団体との契約によりニュース以外の番組に英文字幕をつけることはできません。

According to my Japanese friend, Japanese Answer is slightly
different from English answer.

jholic
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 2984
Joined: Feb 3rd, '04, 19:53
Location: missin' hawaii

Post by jholic » May 26th, '04, 02:02

krys wrote:No. Those are subtitles ripped from dvds.
if all of those subs were ripped from dvd's, then why are there 4-8 different versions of subs for the same movie?? four to eight different dvd's? i don't think so.
No. Your friends must rip subtitles from dvds as well. Anime softsubtitles made by fans are scarce.
you are incorrect. there are about four of them (fluent in jp/eng), and they actually sit in front of computers/video players and hard code them into vhs or cd. i watch quite a bit of anime, but i rarely particpate in their forums or anything. but my friends have mentioned that there are quite a few subbers on the mainland. i don't believe it is 'scarce.'
furthermore, i want to point out that the nature of FANsubbing is that fans actually sub the eps. most of the anime that are fansubbed have not come out on dvd's (otherwise, they would be licensed, and most fansubbers will not sub licensed anime). therefore, the subs could not have been ripped from dvd's.
No. Drama softsubtitles made by fans are scarce as well.
My point being, you may create such a site but as much useful it would be, it would never be as rich in stuff as kloofy's, not even a bit.
since you have no stats, and neither do i, we are at an impasse.

however, if a site like kloofy's did not exist, i think most people would believe that fansubbing of asian movies were scarce as well. i don't think that the site would need to be as "rich in stuff" as kloofy's. just to offer an area to encourage fansubbing for dramas.

krys, thanks for your insightful reply.

jholic
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 2984
Joined: Feb 3rd, '04, 19:53
Location: missin' hawaii

Post by jholic » May 26th, '04, 02:30

wow!! what a discussion!! :crazy: i think several of you should think about becoming law students. i am way out of my league when it comes to copyrights, trademarks, etc. i don't dare delve into that.

but, i think one point was a bit misconstrued.

it is true that borders, b&n, and many other places allow people to listen to entire songs, watch videos, read books, etc, because of their studies that perusal may lead to sales.

HOWEVER, that is not quite the same as we are doing here. (i am guilty as charged.) we are dling, trading, perusing, whatever you want to call it, entire copies of the material. in many instances, the copies are nearly indistinguishable from the original.

i don't believe MPAA/RIAA and other folks would be as mif'd if we were to post 15min previews of these movies, 40sec soundclips of the ost's, etc. (heck, they might even send us better copies!) but, we have posted the movie/drama, etc in its entirety - from start to finish.

the other thing to note is that this material does not expire. if there was a way to send you the entire shaolin soccer movie on a cd that would magically disintegrate in three days, perhaps the lawyers might be a little more forgiving. but nothing assures them that i am going to delete the file. check out the thread, "BACKING UP," and you'll see that the majority are saving it.

would borders appreciate me going into their store w/ my laptop and scanner, and start scanning in their magazines in their comfortable couch? how about bringing in my high-end capture card and recording their cd's from their convenient listening stations? hey, i'm sorry, but i peruse much better on my vga screen. i promise i'll delete it when i leave.

now, i don't want to piss anyone off, but i thought that was something pretty important that was missed. although an argument may be made that perusal leads to sales, we are not quite "perusing" these files.

i await the coming flame... :crazy:

ad
Posts: 44
Joined: Mar 10th, '04, 08:39
Location: LA

Post by ad » May 26th, '04, 04:08

groink wrote:This is what REALLY bugging me...

I've heard a couple of people mention that they believe in the "trial before purchase" theory. Right off the bat, I think that's total bullsh*t!!!!

It's like hanging around the magazine rack... You pick up a magazine, then you browse through it. Whether or not you like the content of the magazine, you DID in fact gather information from that source. There's no way a human being can dump the information from their head. You should in fact pay the publisher for absorbing that information. This is why many bookstores do not like people browsing through magazines (they have signs posted), though personally I don't see them enforcing this rule.

"trial before purchase" is not a right, it's a good business practice. HOwever, i want to draw everybody's attention to this post because it highlights a change in the concept of media that occured in the end of the last century.


Take books for example, until 400 years ago books were hand-writteng, therefore expensive and rare. The medium itself more than the content, determined the value of a book. Making copies was hard and the concept of copyrright didn't exist. Nowadays it's the other way around but the treatment of the IP products by most people still remains the same. Most people still want to think that if the own medium they can do with it all they want. For example, most people don't think it's wrong to install the same copy of Windows on all computers at home. They bought the CD, they own it and can to with it all they want.

However, a new class of people who make money selling copies (called IP rights holders) want to sell everybody as much stuff as possible. So they started to educate people that owning a medium doesn't mean having a right to use in any way you want. If you own a CD with Windows 2000 you can't sell it. You can't instal on two computers. If you own a music CD you can't make a copy of it to listen in the car.

Groink is a good example of a perosn who bought this idea, for him a magazine is not a stack of glossy toilet paper it's INFORMATION. And of course, once opened it contaminated your with that information you got pay up.

I for one still consifer books, magazines, music CDs as comodities. When i buy them i think that i buy a few pieces of paper or plastic but not a _right_ to read or listen that cr*p.

And i have a feeling that majority people think the same way, do they?

No??? Ahhh :w00t:
groink wrote: These people keep digging for more stupid and idiotic things to support their cause.
--- groink
Others think people should buy books and magazines sealed in black tape without looking at them and "keep digging for more stupid and idiotic things to support their cause."

:mrgreen:

User avatar
PhilsterT
Posts: 50
Joined: Mar 26th, '04, 01:31
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by PhilsterT » May 26th, '04, 04:40

You pick up a magazine, then you browse through it. Whether or not you like the content of the magazine, you DID in fact gather information from that source
I really respect your opinion but I have to say 2 things why I disagree.

1) I am a proud buyer of Japanese music (my collection grows about 2-3 CDs per month) and I started out by previewing some songs online. Hypothetically, let's see what would have happened if I didn't listen to those couple of songs...well, not much would have happened. Now, I'm a huge buyer of Japanese music, always on the ball. I LOVE the original copies of DVDs and CDs much more than rips, so when I plan to move to Japan, I also plan on buying Beautiful Life, GTO, and Good Luck as starters. I beleive this argument is very valid and definitley holds water. I always buy the original (or will buy) if I like the content, if I don't like the content, I delete it off my computer, therefore, either I will have the original or I won't have it on my computer.

2) The reason I find your quote invalid is because your comment is just you trying to bring up an argument that holds no water. You say that you open a magazine and see information, so therefore you must pay for it. If you don't notice, you learn a lot more in everyday life (including TV) which you don't have to nescisscairly have to pay for. For example, you could probably get that same information from a TV, internet, friends/ gossip, et cetera. Should you pay your friends everytime they gossip? People flip through magazines to see if the articles look intresting, they don't stand there to read it, and if they do, they need to buy it because they will be doing what I do in [reason 1]. Are you refering to someone reading part or whole of a magazine? If whole, then I agree with you that they should buy it. But this only works with childrens books and magazines because most novels tend to be multiple chapters which would lead to multiple trips to the book store :P .

*Oh BTW, I could care less about the J-movies, I guess it would be an itnresting but I can just go down to the rental store and rent them. I guess it would be intresting and helpful, but no pressure from me. Groink, thanks for D-addicts, that's more than enough for me now.*

ad
Posts: 44
Joined: Mar 10th, '04, 08:39
Location: LA

Post by ad » May 26th, '04, 04:52

jholic wrote:wow!! what a discussion!! :crazy: i think several of you should think about becoming law students. i am way out of my league when it comes to copyrights, trademarks, etc. i don't dare delve into that.
Yeah, too many lawyers on the board, :x talking about lawyer's stuff. Knowing all this cr*p is useless unless you are a lawyer and plan to make money ripping people off.

The truth is litigation is extremely expesive in this country, even if you are right. That's why nobody fights RIAA. It is cheaper to pay $3,000. Knowing that you right not always will save you.

Personally i have jsut a pure academic interest in exploring the evolution of the concepts of intellectual property.
jholic wrote: would borders appreciate me going into their store w/ my laptop and scanner, and start scanning in their magazines in their comfortable couch? how about bringing in my high-end capture card and recording their cd's from their convenient listening stations? hey, i'm sorry, but i peruse much better on my vga screen. i promise i'll delete it when i leave.

now, i don't want to piss anyone off, but i thought that was something pretty important that was missed. although an argument may be made that perusal leads to sales, we are not quite "perusing" these files.

i await the coming flame... :crazy:
There won't be no flame. What's your point, dude? Be more specific. Borders, surely, won't appreciate your going into the store with a scanner. They will be very unhappy.

Some of us can't marry Matsu Takako and that makes us very unhappy, so what? Bill Gate won't be happy until everybody on the planet will be running windows, and linux kids wont be happy till Billy is dead. Everybody can't be happy.

krys
Posts: 13
Joined: Jan 13th, '04, 10:16

Post by krys » May 26th, '04, 06:49

jholic wrote:if all of those subs were ripped from dvd's, then why are there 4-8 different versions of subs for the same movie?? four to eight different dvd's? i don't think so.
Ripped by different people, having some phrases/errors corrected, adjusted to 1/2/3 cd encodes...
you are incorrect. there are about four of them (fluent in jp/eng), and they actually sit in front of computers/video players and hard code them into vhs or cd. i watch quite a bit of anime, but i rarely particpate in their forums or anything. but my friends have mentioned
Now, is there anything to add to your own comment? I still think you are incorrect.
that there are quite a few subbers on the mainland.
What is that mainland?
i don't believe it is 'scarce.'
You may believe whatever you wish. It is your choice. But i know it its.
furthermore, i want to point out that the nature of FANsubbing is that fans actually sub the eps. most of the anime that are fansubbed have not come out on dvd's (otherwise, they would be licensed, and most fansubbers will not sub licensed anime). therefore, the subs could not have been ripped from dvd's.
It seems you are talking about hardsubs now. Can not see the difference?
since you have no stats, and neither do i, we are at an impas
I have no stats but you have no subs so it is not an impasse at all.
however, if a site like kloofy's did not exist, i think most people would believe that fansubbing of asian movies were scarce as well.
Fansubs of asian movies are scarce as most of them (if not all) are shipped with english subs already so there is no need to translate.
thanks for your insightful reply.
I rarely descend and bother with the issue of minuscules but it is nice to see my efforts are appreciated when i do.

beer
Posts: 148
Joined: Jan 28th, '04, 20:28

Post by beer » May 26th, '04, 14:18

Just briefly about anime:

Since the onslaught of .ogm and .mkv formats there have actually been a few initiatives in fansubbing world to include multiple languages in the same package. Nevertheless I don't seriously remember seeing any softfansub, unless it was to replace the subs from a ripped HK-DVD.

Actually griping about hardsubs, their typesetting and timing is one of the favorite pastimes of anime community.

Then again, I beg to differ from the opinion that 'most' Asian movie DVDs come with ripped subititles. I appear to have movies aplenty for which subtitles appeared significantly later. Curiously - most such subtitles showed up at kloofy's first.

And returning to drama subtitles, with all due respect and everything, I really-really wish someone would do something about Uso Koi subtitles. I could fix the English and timing myself, except that I have severe doubts about whether the existing Engrish has any (even supreficial) connection with the original Japanese spoken. The English subs for spoken English in that series usually say something different. This, if anything, would be a definitely worthy project for d-addicts.

BTW: As opposed to JTV's joke about facial expressions I think this series relies on those expressions too heavily.

P.S. Should JTV, on the other hand, need someone to translate their Triumph in the Skies subs into English, I'd be happy to oblige since I have respect for the group (except for QC for this series) and I like the series pretty much. Especially when a 400 meter dash from the cathedral to the town hall takes the biker across the river in Firenze. :D

/me wipes foam off the corners of his mouth and settles down to watch something.

jholic
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 2984
Joined: Feb 3rd, '04, 19:53
Location: missin' hawaii

Post by jholic » May 26th, '04, 18:44

ad wrote:There won't be no flame. What's your point, dude? Be more specific. Borders, surely, won't appreciate your going into the store with a scanner. They will be very unhappy.
Some of us can't marry Matsu Takako and that makes us very unhappy, so what? Bill Gate won't be happy until everybody on the planet will be running windows, and linux kids wont be happy till Billy is dead. Everybody can't be happy.
sorry, i had to leave, so i rushed the ending, but i thought the point was still clear. i'm addressing my opinion on the many posts i see about fair use, perusing, trying it out before you buy, etc. there are several people that seem to compare what we are doing to borrowing a book at the library, listening to a cd at a store, downloading a preview, reading a book at borders, etc.

though i love this site and many of the people on it, support freedom of speech, love the ability to d/l and trade things on the internet, etc, i won't kid myself and try to sugar-coat it. it's not the same as "previewing" something.

ad
Posts: 44
Joined: Mar 10th, '04, 08:39
Location: LA

Post by ad » May 26th, '04, 21:31

jholic wrote: though i love this site and many of the people on it, support freedom of speech, love the ability to d/l and trade things on the internet, etc, i won't kid myself and try to sugar-coat it. it's not the same as "previewing" something.
I think it's pretty close to previewing. I do buy CDs and DVDs. I paid for all my Mozart, Bach, Beethoven and Led Zeppelin music. But unlike groink i will never pay $20 for a movie i haven't seen before (and therefore i know i'll want to watch again). I dont' pirate Hollywood movies. I rent them at Blockbuster for $3. But i can't " preview" j-movies at Blockbuster so i preview them on the internet. I would pay $3 per movie if somebody bothered to collect it. It just happens that i still have digital copies of the movies on my hard drive after "previewing". I delete most of them anyway.

Technological progress enabled encoding of high quality video on portable media and at the same time it also enabled transmission of high fidelity copies of the digital media. The world is changing fast these days we have to adapt and not to try to stay in the past.

I don't care about copyright laws. Laws can be changed and not all laws are strictly enforced. The crux of the matter is whtat people think is "right " and "moral" and what is not. Of course, all these things are functions of time and place. But if the majority of the population thinks that downloading music and movies is normal the laws will have to change of way of another. You can't outlaw the majority, usually it leads to revolutions.

One possible scenario, the list of the MPs who voted for the DMCA and similar acts gets posted on Kazaa and emule web sites and also gets distrubuted thru the networks. THe p2p network users have become a very large group of people with common interests connected by fast and reliable communication networks. It's just a matter of time before they become a strong political force.

User avatar
BT-Slut
Posts: 220
Joined: Apr 8th, '04, 09:33
Location: China
Contact:

Post by BT-Slut » May 26th, '04, 23:12

ad wrote:Technological progress enabled encoding of high quality video on portable media and at the same time it also enabled transmission of high fidelity copies of the digital media. The world is changing fast these days we have to adapt and not to try to stay in the past.

I don't care about copyright laws. Laws can be changed and not all laws are strictly enforced. The crux of the matter is whtat people think is "right " and "moral" and what is not. Of course, all these things are functions of time and place. But if the majority of the population thinks that downloading music and movies is normal the laws will have to change of way of another. You can't outlaw the majority, usually it leads to revolutions.
This is stated very well ad. I agree with you 100%. The draconian copyright laws will change in the future. Laws and politics swing on a pendulum. Right now, it's swinging overly extreme to one side and it will correct it self shortly.

jholic
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 2984
Joined: Feb 3rd, '04, 19:53
Location: missin' hawaii

Post by jholic » May 27th, '04, 03:39

ad wrote:I think it's pretty close to previewing.
i don't think it's close. refer to my earlier post. i believe a "preview" is a few quotes from a magazine, five minutes from a movie, 40 sec from a song, etc. not the whole thing.
ad wrote:I delete most of them anyway.
you're a better man than i. however, i don't believe you are in the majority.
ad wrote:Technological progress enabled encoding of high quality video on portable media and at the same time it also enabled transmission of high fidelity copies of the digital media. The world is changing fast these days we have to adapt and not to try to stay in the past.
according to what you just said, technology should be the driving force of our laws. since we now have better technology, we can use it for practically any purpose? nowadays, people shell out $10-20 a pop for a movie. you think a 5min preview is enough to get me into a theater? no way. i gotta be able to watch the entire thing before i go in.

since X has a tiny digital camera that can see through walls, he can just face it toward the shower of his neighbor's house. when Z gets the file, he should be able to share it to whomever he pleases. otherwise, why did he spend $1800 on his computer equip?

people make laws. technology does not. i hope it always stays that way.
ad wrote:I don't care about copyright laws. Laws can be changed and not all laws are strictly enforced. The crux of the matter is whtat people think is "right " and "moral" and what is not. Of course, all these things are functions of time and place. But if the majority of the population thinks that downloading music and movies is normal the laws will have to change of way of another. You can't outlaw the majority, usually it leads to revolutions.
spoken like a true young rebel.
but think carefully about what you said. the 'majority' often changes its mind (that's why laws are not created by the 'majority), especially when the outcome starts affecting the individuals in the majority. and the 'majority' will not be in your courtroom backing you when the RIAA sues you.

the crux of the matter is NOT what people think is right and moral, etc. the crux is WHAT PEOPLE THINK THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH. c'mon, isn't that why we're here? if the RIAA sued 100% of the people who d/ls, and won 100% of the time, how many people do you honestly think would still be doing it?

the MAJORITY of the people here knows d/l apps, movies, dramas, etc. is wrong. that is a fact. but, most do it because there is little chance they will get caught. agreed?

sometimes you jaywalk. you don't wear your seatbelt. you speed. you take a pen home from work. etc. do you realize how many people steal (big or small)? muggings, robbery, banks, petty thefts, identity theft, printer paper from school, rulers from work, etc. people do it all the dang time!! the laws gotta change to accomodate the majority. if i see your backpack sitting alone on that chair, i've got a fundamental right to take it home and guard the belongings better than you, right?

the laws need to be based on what is right. not what the majority feels. you and i both know much of what goes on in p2p is wrong. but it's done because we haven't gotten the 'letter' yet (like Ruroshin). we are doing it because we feel we can get away with it.

BT Slut: perhaps, one day, the laws will be a little more relaxed, but i doubt laws will ever allow people to get other people's material w/o some type of compensation. this country was built on the backs of hardworking entrepenuers. their rights have to be respected too.

i have to side w/ groink on this one. i love being able to d/l stuff, but as soon as a letter comes, its time to be much more careful. j-addicts would only increase the exposure to our community (and getting caught), so i vote we keep ourselves on the downlow.

User avatar
BT-Slut
Posts: 220
Joined: Apr 8th, '04, 09:33
Location: China
Contact:

Post by BT-Slut » May 27th, '04, 04:53

jholic wrote:
the MAJORITY of the people here knows d/l apps, movies, dramas, etc. is wrong. that is a fact. but, most do it because there is little chance they will get caught. agreed?

sometimes you jaywalk. you don't wear your seatbelt. you speed. you take a pen home from work. etc. do you realize how many people steal (big or small)? muggings, robbery, banks, petty thefts, identity theft, printer paper from school, rulers from work, etc. people do it all the dang time!! the laws gotta change to accomodate the majority. if i see your backpack sitting alone on that chair, i've got a fundamental right to take it home and guard the belongings better than you, right?

the laws need to be based on what is right. not what the majority feels. you and i both know much of what goes on in p2p is wrong. but it's done because we haven't gotten the 'letter' yet (like Ruroshin). we are doing it because we feel we can get away with it.

BT Slut: perhaps, one day, the laws will be a little more relaxed, but i doubt laws will ever allow people to get other people's material w/o some type of compensation. this country was built on the backs of hardworking entrepenuers. their rights have to be respected too.

i have to side w/ groink on this one. i love being able to d/l stuff, but as soon as a letter comes, its time to be much more careful. j-addicts would only increase the exposure to our community (and getting caught), so i vote we keep ourselves on the downlow.
jholic, I debated for some time whether to post this or not, but ultimately decided to take the time and reply to you. Because I really want you to understand the fundamental issue here. I don't believe the majority of people realize the whole situation.

In your post, you state that downloading movies or music is wrong but we do it because we can get away with it. I believe you've been brainwashed by the propaganda and actually believe the bullshit rhetoric. It is NOT wrong and I'll explain why.

Even the Supreme Court of the United States has declared that copyright infringement for personal use is NOT the same thing as physical theft. Piracy is NOT a term used by the courts. It is a term used by the industry to paint a very negative image of people downloading files.

Now let me explain why copyright infringement is not wrong for personal use. In all the examples you cite above, when someone breaks the law, it's a physical, tangible action. When you 'steal' a pen from work or use the copying machine at work to make personal copies, there is actual physical resources that is being diverted from the company to you. That is to say, for every pen you take home, there is one less pen for the company's use. For every copy you make on the Xerox machine at work, there is one less copy for the company's consumption. So this is real, physical theft. Your gain is at the direct expense of the company's.

The HUGE difference with copyright infringement is that when you gain, NO ONE really loses. That is to say, if you make a copy of MSFT Office at work and bring it home to use, the company you made the copy at still has MSFT Office to use. You have not taken something from the company to use at your home. They still have a copy and now you have a copy. Your gain was not created at the expense of the company. And NO, it's not at the expense of MSFT because you never would have purchased MSFT Office for $495 even if you weren't able to make a copy from work.

Another example. If you go into a Blockbuster and physically steal a DVD movie, that is a real theft. Your gain of a DVD movie was at the expense of Blockbuster because Blockbuster could have sold that physical copy to someone else. But if you go to your friends house and copy the movie to your own DVD-R, there is no loss to anyone. Your friend still has the copy. Your gain is NOT at the expense of someone else. Again, if you download a movie from the internet, your gain is NOT at the expense of someone else.

The argument from the industry is that they've indeed lost a sale because had you NOT been allowed to make a copy, you would have gone out and purchased the item. Well, as groink likes to say, that's BULLSHIT. A person wouldn't have gone out and purchased Adobe Photoshop or MSFT Office for $700 and $495 respectively if they weren't able to download it over the net. The totally bullshit revenue figures you hear from the software, music, and movie industries about potential sales they would have had if it weren't for "piracy" is total BS. They would NEVER have sold those copies to begin with.

Simply put, copyright infringement for personal use is NOT wrong. When I download a movie from the net, it's a virutal duplication that was accomplished at the expense of NO ONE. NO ONE lost because I made a virtual copy. Yes, I have gained, but at no one's expense. I wouldn't have purchased the movie if I weren't able to download it. The movie industry wants to pretend that I would have gone out and purchased the movie. That's just wishful thinking. I would NOT have. It is only because I could download the movie for free that I downloaded it. They ignore this huge fact. Because it was FREE, people download the movies. These lies about potential sales lost is pure BS.

When there is a real issue for prosecution is when the duplicated copy is sold for a profit. If I download a movie from the net and burn it to a CD-R and sell that copy to someone else for a profit, then it is indeed wrong. Because in this example, I am actually profitting from someone else's work. The people who actually download these movies and re-sell them for a profit should definitely be prosecuted. I agree with that. In this case, because I have sold a copy to someone else, I have profitted at the expense of the original copyright holder. There was a real demand by someone who wanted to pay for a copy of the work. This copy that I sold and made a profit on should have been sold by the original copyright holder and s/he should have made the profit. In a case like that, I would agree that it's wrong.

But for home users who download a copy to view for themselves only, it is not wrong. But you have been led to believe that this is wrong and you've bought into the propaganda. However, I tell you again, it is NOT wrong. It really does fall under the fair use catagory. So long as you do not make a profit from the creative work of someone else, you are not doing anything wrong. For pesonal use, you've not profitted from someone else's efforts.

When you go to the library to borrow books to read or borrow DVD movies to watch, you don't have to pay to borrow and view the items. Do you think that's wrong? In the old days, it was because of limited technology that one couldn't easily replicate the media which required that you go back to the library and return the items you've borrowed. Well, now a days, the technology actually exists so that it's a moot process. The book or movie can be replicated without cost. It's totally a political issue. It's about greed and exploitation.

One day, we may be lucky enough to have a world where everything is open sourced. Books, music, movies and software are all open sourced and will be distributed over the internet freely.
Last edited by BT-Slut on May 27th, '04, 05:03, edited 1 time in total.

ad
Posts: 44
Joined: Mar 10th, '04, 08:39
Location: LA

Post by ad » May 27th, '04, 05:03

jholic wrote: i don't think it's close. refer to my earlier post. i believe a "preview" is a few quotes from a magazine, five minutes from a movie, 40 sec from a song, etc. not the whole thing.
I put "previewing" in quotes because it's more like renting. I'd rent this stuff at Blockbuster but it doesn't carry it. I'd pay $3 per movie but don't know who give it to.
jholic wrote: since X has a tiny digital camera that can see through walls, he can just face it toward the shower of his neighbor's house. when Z gets the file, he should be able to share it to whomever he pleases. otherwise, why did he spend $1800 on his computer equip?
if you dumb enough to get videotaped in your own shower then you deserve the pictures of your sorry naked a$$ posteed on the internet.
jholic wrote: people make laws. technology does not. i hope it always stays that way.
People make laws to control the society. Technology shapes the society. Thus laws must change to be relevant. The advent of automobile, for example, created the necesity of updating and better enfocing traffic laws.
jholic wrote: spoken like a true young rebel.
I'm almost thirty, i bet i'm older than you. ...Perhaps i'm young at heart. :P
jholic wrote: but think carefully about what you said. the 'majority' often changes its mind (that's why laws are not created by the 'majority), especially when the outcome starts affecting the individuals in the majority. and the 'majority' will not be in your courtroom backing you when the RIAA sues you.
I very carefully think berore posting stuff, that's why the number of my posts is so low.

The laws are not created BY the majority, of course, they are created FOR the majority.

Majority does not rule because mob cannot govern but in the long run majority prevails.
jholic wrote: and the 'majority' will not be in your courtroom backing you when the RIAA sues you.
Remeber that russian hacker who hacked Adobe ebook encryption.
jholic wrote: if the RIAA sued 100% of the people who d/ls, and won 100% of the time, how many people do you honestly think would still be doing it?
The same 100%. Only after next election.
jholic wrote: you take a pen home from work. etc. do you realize how many people steal (big or small)? muggings, robbery, banks, petty thefts, identity theft, printer paper from school, rulers from work, etc. people do it all the dang time!! the laws gotta change to accomodate the majority.
The majority people around me DO NOT STEAL!!!. They would even return a vallet if they found it in the street. Perhaps, they should send more police officers to your neighborhood.

jholic wrote: the laws need to be based on what is right. not what the majority feels.
And who determines what's right.

Ok, lets stop the discussion right here. There is fundamental difference between you and i. It seems you believe in existence of absolute "right " and "wrong" and i believe those thing are relative. I use the perception of the majority of populace at given time as reference. What's right and what's wrong is a function of time and place. For example, slavery was "right" in the US 150 years ago, and "wrong" now. Divorce was not allowed in Europe some 600 years but ok now.

Some people, however, believe that there are absolute''moral" values, defined by the Bible, Coran, Adolf Hitler or George W. Bush. You can't argue with those people, all you can do is turn away and run, run, run....

PS By the way, what did the Bible say about copyright infrigment? What? there's no word copyright there?

User avatar
BT-Slut
Posts: 220
Joined: Apr 8th, '04, 09:33
Location: China
Contact:

Post by BT-Slut » May 27th, '04, 05:10

ad wrote: Divorce was not allowed in Europe some 600 years but ok now.
If it were only so. Not until 1999 or 2000, did the constitution of Ireland change to allow for divorce. So prior to this change, it was absolutely illegal--technically--to get a divorce.

I agree you absolutely. Laws are a function of time and place. It's perfectly legal to have multiple wives in Saudia Arabia in 2004. And as of May 18th 2004, gays can get legally married in the state of MA. Fuction of time and place indeed.

krys
Posts: 13
Joined: Jan 13th, '04, 10:16

Post by krys » May 27th, '04, 08:28

BT-Slut wrote:[...]it is not wrong. But you have been led to believe that this is wrong and you've bought into the propaganda. However, I tell you again, it is NOT wrong.
:w00t:
Cos Jesus he knows me
And he knows I’m right
I’ve been talking to Jesus all my life
Oh yes he knows me
And he knows I’m right
And he’s been telling me
Everything is alright

jholic
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 2984
Joined: Feb 3rd, '04, 19:53
Location: missin' hawaii

Post by jholic » May 28th, '04, 00:04

BT Slut/ad: i harbor no animosity toward either of you, since we all share the love of the same thing. as you both stated, we just have differing views of the p2p situation.

don't worry, i don't believe i'm any more affected by propoganda than either of you are. no matter how you look at it, everyone has been affected by media/propaganda/whatever in some way. i just think our life experiences have been different, and therefore, we have differing views on certain situations.

i thought both of your posts held strong opinions which i respect. i agree with some things, but not all. to be fair, i will also address some of your statements.
BT-Slut wrote:The argument from the industry is that they've indeed lost a sale because had you NOT been allowed to make a copy, you would have gone out and purchased the item. Well, as groink likes to say, that's BULLSHIT. A person wouldn't have gone out and purchased Adobe Photoshop or MSFT Office for $700 and $495 respectively if they weren't able to download it over the net. The totally bullshit revenue figures you hear from the software, music, and movie industries about potential sales they would have had if it weren't for "piracy" is total BS. They would NEVER have sold those copies to begin with.
although i believe the figures may be bloated, but it is not totally bs. many people do not pay the exorbitant costs of computer software because there is an ALTERNATIVE (dl it for free off of the net). if there were absolutely NO alternative, people (who want that software) would be forced to buy it. since there is statistical proof of revenue, then there are people who are willing to pay the cost. perhaps YOU would not, but there are others who would - therefore, proving there is a theoritical loss of revenue.

right now, if you want a lexus - you have no choice but to go and buy one. there isn't an alternative. but let's say there was a technology that could duplicate a lexus from nothing. this technology is freely distributed to others. everyone starts duplicating lexuses. are you saying that lexus would not experience a loss in revenue?

there is the often debated issue about exorbitant costs being caused by piracy, and vice versa. trust me, software costs would be cheaper if it were not for piracy. same as insurance costs would be cheaper if not for fraud, doctor bills would be cheaper if not for malpractice, etc. i'm not saying it would be fair or what you would be willing to pay - but cheaper.

now, let me ask: how many people pay for insurance/doctors? many. how many believe the prices to be fair? not many. why do you keep paying? there's no ALTERNATIVE. if you had a cheaper or free alternative, would you take it? yes. would those insurance companies/doctors then experience revenue loss?

BT-Slut wrote:When you go to the library to borrow books to read or borrow DVD movies to watch, you don't have to pay to borrow and view the items. Do you think that's wrong?
ah, yes. the library example again. first of all, in hawaii, public libraries DO charge a nominal fee for dvd rentals. (yes, the cost of living in paradise). do you think that the library sprouted from the roots of trees? the books and dvds appeared magically or were all donated by the library fairy? most libraries are run by the government, therefore we ALL pay for the library - through our TAXES (some people contribute more through donations). and thus, i do not feel one bit of guilt when borrowing from the library.

but in your defense, would i copy a dvd from the library (if i knew there were a low percentage chance of me getting caught)? yes. would i know it was wrong? yes (according to current law). why would i do it? explained below.

ad wrote:I'm almost thirty, i bet i'm older than you. ...Perhaps i'm young at heart.
HA! i'm older than you so hand me back my cane, dammit!! :)

ad wrote:Some people, however, believe that there are absolute''moral" values, defined by the Bible, Coran, Adolf Hitler or George W. Bush. You can't argue with those people, all you can do is turn away and run, run, run....
PS By the way, what did the Bible say about copyright infrigment? What? there's no word copyright there?
i respect the views/laws of other countries, but i try to concentrate on our own. many people are quick to point out some great laws of countries overseas. but what if we took ALL the laws of that other country? hm, not as quick.

BT-Slut wrote:One day, we may be lucky enough to have a world where everything is open sourced. Books, music, movies and software are all open sourced and will be distributed over the internet freely.
in some ways, we would be lucky, and in some ways, we won't.

ok, some questions:

1. you all know american idol. while watching it, i couldn't help but think of an irony. the contestants are all 16 - 24yrs old. given the demographics of music d/lers, i can safely say that several of them probably d/l music from the net. i wonder how those contestants will feel when other people are d/ling their songs and cutting into their profits.
so what if you were an entertainment talent/employee? (not superstar status, but just good enough to eek out a living.) but you're not in college anymore, got a family to support, and more bills to pay. your agent tells you that the song/movie/whatever (that you helped on) is top of the charts!! but revenue from cd/dvd/boxofc sales is just kinda average (most of it going to the people that sign your paycheck). great news is that its the number one most downloaded thing on the net!

do you feel your views about d/ling would change? do you feel other d/lers, placed in that situation, would feel the same as you?


2. your utopia of the internet comes true! media is now open-source. it is completely legal to dl/trade/etc off the net.

how would entertainment workers make money? (i don't mean just the actors/actresses/ceo/producers) why would writers write? singers sing? how about the camera people, the lighting guy, the sound guy, the distributors, the clerk at the record store, the extras, the theaters, etc. do you think there would be a loss of jobs?


3. after years of research and sacrifice, Z comes up with an OS that's superior to windows, mac, linux, everything! he has intentions of selling it at a very reasonable $100. but someone gets a hold of it, and distributes it on the net as freeware. Z argues to the courts that he's the creator and he's losing millions in revenue. the courts agree that he's the owner, but tell him that in terms of revenue, it's just propaganda bs, and he's got no stats to prove real revenue loss.

do you feel that the benefit gained by so many (at the expense of Z) was ok? what if Z was a close friend of yours?



i apologize for the extra long post. the questions were mostly rhetoric in nature, so you don't need to waste your time answering them. it was just food for thought. i just believe that some of the statements being made are because we cannot place a face to who we are affecting, we don't have someone close who this directly relates to.

while i agree and share your actions, i believe we disagree with the reasoning behind those actions. heck, i'm in a no-win situation! despite all the cr*p i just wrote, i still d/l all kinds of stuff! so please don't take this post as a holier-than-thou stance.

i d/l because (for now) there's a low percentage of getting caught and because i don't have anyone that i can see it personally affecting. if either situation were to ever change, i think my actions would change as well. how about you guys?

JALAL
Posts: 16
Joined: Dec 26th, '03, 08:07
Location: Sweden

Post by JALAL » May 28th, '04, 00:39

Bro, you deserve a medal for the long post you wrote :lol (and I did read it all 8) )

I just wanted to say ( about the Bibel stuff..) :
You shouldnt steal, it's a sin! And what isthe difination of stealing?! :roll
You shouldnt take something from someone without his permission! <-- spelling "error" !

You know what dude?! those who pay 70 $ for acrobat are huge companys who are obligated to pay for the stuff.. they cant use warez :glare: And there is no way in hell that I or anybody else with a brain would pay for something like acrobat, even if we had the money that is :mrgreen:

And regarding Mr. Z , he could always make money from updates for his great OS..
I mean if he had realesed his OS and sold it first.. probably ppl wouldnt have taken the risk to buy his stuff but when ppl got his stuff for free and saw how awesome it was they wouldnt doubt buying new realeses from Mr. Z.
Than the "crime" would actually benefit him somehow :w00t:

And well.. Just like you Bro I jus dont care about the whole story.. I download the stuff as long as it is possible! And yeah plz excuse my BAD english!

ad
Posts: 44
Joined: Mar 10th, '04, 08:39
Location: LA

Post by ad » May 28th, '04, 05:53

jholic,

I had no animosity toward you, either. I never attacked you, only your ideas. I am willing to continue discussion as long as we don't try to appeal to absolute moral values. Because where dogma begins constructive discussions usually end.
jholic wrote:don't worry, i don't believe i'm any more affected by propoganda than either of you are. no matter how you look at it, everyone has been affected by media/propaganda/whatever in some way. i just think our life experiences have been different, and therefore, we have differing views on certain situations.
Different life experiences surely make people view things differently. But they don't change the perception of facts, only the attitude towards them.

I do not believe you were affected by propaganda. I just think you base your analysis on emotions but not on the facts. I also think that you are trying to make conclusions looking at a static picture, at the thing how they are now. And you are assuming that how they should always be.

Also I could figure out from your last post what you were trying to say. You gave many examples but failed to articulate your conclusions.
jholic wrote:
ad wrote:Some people, however, believe that there are absolute''moral" values, defined by the Bible, Coran, Adolf Hitler or George W. Bush. You can't argue with those people, all you can do is turn away and run, run, run....
PS By the way, what did the Bible say about copyright infrigment? What? there's no word copyright there?
i respect the views/laws of other countries, but i try to concentrate on our own. many people are quick to point out some great laws of countries overseas. but what if we took ALL the laws of that other country? hm, not as quick.
Ok, what's the point here? You don't have your own feeling of what's right and what's wrong? You need law to tell you that? If they pass a law ordering to kill Jews you will follow without hesitation, huh?

I never said "LAWS" i said 'values". Moral values govern human behaviour. Laws are just written down procedures of implementing socially acceptible behaviour. When a law does not reflect modern moral values it gets repealled or just stop being enforeced.

If you moral values are defined by the current laws of the state of Hawaii then go to the libray memorize them all and follow them strictly. I suggest you take your computer to the police station and admit your wrongdoings , not reporting a crime is a crime also. End of story, nothing to discuss here.
jholic wrote: your agent tells you that the song/movie/whatever (that you helped on) is top of the charts!! but revenue from cd/dvd/boxofc sales is just kinda average (most of it going to the people that sign your paycheck). great news is that its the number one most downloaded thing on the net!

do you feel your views about d/ling would change? do you feel other d/lers, placed in that situation, would feel the same as you?
How would i feel? i don't let my feelings interfere with my analysis of data ( sociological data in our case).
jholic wrote: 2. your utopia of the internet comes true! media is now open-source. it is completely legal to dl/trade/etc off the net.

how would entertainment workers make money?
How did they make money before the invention of the phonograph? In the middle ages, new songs written by bards were not protected by copyright, how did they make money?
Short answer: Performances.


jholic wrote:
(i don't mean just the actors/actresses/ceo/producers) why would writers write? singers sing? how about the camera people, the lighting guy, the sound guy, the distributors, the clerk at the record store, the extras, the theaters, etc. do you think there would be a loss of jobs?
Right, they’ve got a God-given right to have the same job forever. None of them have ever been laid off. That ‘s entertainment industry we are talking about.
jholic wrote: 3. after years of research and sacrifice, Z comes up with an OS that's superior to windows, mac, linux, everything! he has intentions of selling it at a very reasonable $100. but someone gets a hold of it, and distributes it on the net as freeware.
My old roomie works for Mysql. They produce a very popular free as in beer open source database software. The company gives away software for free but sells support. Also if you need a new special feature they’ll add it for you for a chunk of cash. Guess what, they make enough money.
jholic wrote: i apologize for the extra long post. the questions were mostly rhetoric in nature, so you don't need to waste your time answering them. it was just food for thought.
Why don’t you present your conclusions.
jholic wrote: i just believe that some of the statements being made are because we cannot place a face to who we are affecting, we don't have someone close who this directly relates to.
As I said before you cannot keep everybody happy.
jholic wrote: while i agree and share your actions, i believe we disagree with the reasoning behind those actions. heck, i'm in a no-win situation! despite all the cr*p i just wrote, i still d/l all kinds of stuff! so please don't take this post as a holier-than-thou stance.
You are definitely confused. There is some ambivalence in your actions. If you have problems sleeping at night I suggest counseling. Good sleep is the most important thing.
jholic wrote: how about you guys?
I sleep well, no nightmares.

PS Don’t take my last words as an insult.

jholic
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 2984
Joined: Feb 3rd, '04, 19:53
Location: missin' hawaii

Post by jholic » May 30th, '04, 01:13

ad: i find it ironic that you should accuse me of using emotion. it would be foolhardy of me to appeal to your emotions. since i don't harbor a guilt-trip myself, why would i expect you to? i included possibilities that could occur, and asked if you felt this would be FAIR. just present your honest answer to the situation.

my subsequent posts have not addressed much of your replies. why? although i do not share all of his views, BT-Slut backs much of his views with information and insight; you do not. many of your replies have been simplistic answers to skirt the question. yet, despite what little evidence you present (other than a vague observation), i still take the time to actually read your post.


Example:
ad wrote:"Performances?"
"None of them have ever been laid off??"
did you actually read what you posted??

show of hands - who here goes to the movies? quite a few. who here would still go to the movies if you could LEGALLY d/l the movie for free off of the internet??

the avg budget for movies are nowadays near $100M+. do you think they can justify that by singing like a bard? entertainment industry people do not get laid off?? if your "dl anything off the internet legally" world ever came true, we'd all be watching LOTR with midgets and a C budget.

in not so many words, you pretty much said that entertainers should put on live performances to make money. if they go into the studio to make cd quality material, it would be volunteer work, and for your free enjoyment? wow. and your moral values reflect the MAJORITY of our society?

ad wrote:Ok, what's the point here? You don't have your own feeling of what's right and what's wrong? You need law to tell you that? If they pass a law ordering to kill Jews you will follow without hesitation, huh?
I never said "LAWS" i said 'values". Moral values govern human behaviour. Laws are just written down procedures of implementing socially acceptible behaviour. When a law does not reflect modern moral values it gets repealled or just stop being enforeced.
ok, so basically, in your society, people would follow their values. they would follow laws only as long as it fits their values. (that's pretty much what you're doing.)

see, you have a problem when you point out values. how did you learn your values? from parents and teachers. how did they learn their values? etc. you could be born with the inate sense that killing is wrong. your brother may not have been born with that value. yet, most of society believes that killing is wrong. coincidence? no. basically, values stem generally from laws. laws can shape values and they are handed down generation to generation. what you are saying is that if we had no law about killing, there would be no killing in the streets. that's bs. you and i can argue forever about which came first, the chicken or the egg, but values and laws are equally important.

your view is that duplicating and freely distributing someone else's hard work and ideas is "socially acceptable behavior" and reflects our current "modern moral values"? what would happen if someone didn't share your values? oh, i remember, "majority rules."

you keep telling me that i have an unwavering sense of right and wrong, but if you actually read my posts, it's quite obvious that i do not. like all human beings, i know that laws are not perfect and i also know that people do not share the same values. however, there is one moral value that i feel should never be changed: it should never be legal to duplicate or distribute an individual's work and ideas w/o due compensation to him/her.


let me go back to one of your earlier posts:
ad wrote:But if the majority of the population thinks that downloading music and movies is normal the laws will have to change of way of another. You can't outlaw the majority, usually it leads to revolutions.
you're assuming that the majority of the population does this? the latest population figure of the US is near 300M. if i'm generous, by taking the likely demographics of p2p users at ages 15-35, i reach about 100M. to say that 100% of this age group uses p2p is ludicrous. do you really think that 150M in the US, or 3.3B people across the world use p2p?? therefore, ad, you are very, very much in the minority. do you still think that majority rules? need more convincing? you were kind enough to continually supply me with ample contradictory statements:
ad wrote:For example, slavery was "right" in the US 150 years ago, and "wrong" now. Divorce was not allowed in Europe some 600 years but ok now.
tell me, were blacks the majority or the minority at the time? did you look up the divorce rate in europe? are the majority of people getting divorced??

you even mention your roommate's work at mysql. could you provide me with a copy of his special features program (the one he charges for, not the freeware)? i can get someone to hack it, and post it on the net for free. i know that you feel this is "socially acceptable behavior" and demonstrates our "modern moral values", but could you do me a favor and ask your roommate if he feels the same?


the majority should not always rule. to you, p2p has become socially acceptable because everyone you know is doing it. but you need to realize that, as popular as you may be, not everyone in the POPULATION agrees this is acceptable behavior.


let me close with this. if the statements had been anything similar to:

"hey, it's free and easy."
"hopefully, by distributing this stuff, it'll teach those corporations to lower the prices on their software."
"i ain't paying $25 a dvd when they're probably making a 1000% profit margin on it!"
"hey, money is tight - let's help each other out and keep it on the downlow."
"i can't get this kind of stuff by any reasonable method in my area."
etc.

... i probably would have said MOVE OVER and HAND ME A SIGN!! i agree with a lot of those types of statements. those are honest answers. prices are way too high on many of these things.


but some statements were more along the lines of:

"hey, it's my RIGHT to do this."
"or they should change the law to make it my right to do this."
"everybody's doing this, so they should change the law to make it ok!"
"i'm not hurting anyone by doing this."

these are statements that i do not agree with. and i've given my reasons why i do not agree with them.

lordruin
Posts: 7
Joined: May 5th, '04, 14:45
Location: england

Post by lordruin » May 30th, '04, 10:12

well..........this has certainly generated a debate! At one pole we have groink, and at the other BT-Slut, with most people somewhere between. (My views are similar to those of BT-Slut).
I am quite lost to understand groink. His arguments shift each time he replies:
Firstly, he seems to support the wishes of the movie industry and thinks that their desires are the law.They are not.........the situation is very fluid.
Then he supports the grossly inflated concept of intellectual property rights.
Then he is trying to protect Ruroshin and abusing people with an opposing view, calling them bootleggers, 'coming out of the woodwork, etc.
Given the general tone of these arguments, I am amazed and puzzled to find groink downloading/uploading movies. I can only find 3 possible explanations -

1. He is playing the role of devil's advocate
2. he is a hypocrite
3. he works for the movie industry

I suspect ( and hope) that the first explanation is correct :) - or we are all in trouble
No man is an island

ad
Posts: 44
Joined: Mar 10th, '04, 08:39
Location: LA

Post by ad » May 30th, '04, 12:54

jholic:

all this is turning into a flame war and i'd rather avoid it.

i think you are confusing with a teen who likes to get freebies off the Internet and uses any reasonable and unreasonable arguments to justify his behavior. I'm not into modern pop culture, i don't download gigs of new mp3 or dvd-rips of Hollywood movies. I’ve been using this site to download jdramas as I’m learning Japanese. I would just rent them if they were available at the Bloockbuster one block away form my place. I guess I could probably rent them somewhere in downtown LA but I’m too lazy to drive there/pay for the parking etc. I’m not even interested much in j-movies ‘cos most of them suck.

So out of the list of options you presented I’d pick

"hey, it's free and easy.", definitely easier than to drive to downtown LA.

I was not trying to justify my behavior but to make some observations and draw conclusions from them. As I see from your previous post some of my ideas got misrepresented and distorted. I only blame myself for not being clear. I do not intend to go through our posts line by line and put more gas into the flame. I am just going to reiterate my arguments in a brief and hopefully clear way and end our discussion. You can PM me if you have any questions.

In your previous posts you posed a lot of questions:
“great news is that its the number one most downloaded thing on the net!

do you feel your views about d/ling would change? do you feel other d/lers, placed in that situation, would feel the same as you?”

“do you think there would be a loss of jobs?”
“do you feel that the benefit gained by so many (at the expense of Z) was ok? what if Z was a close friend of yours?”

“if your "dl anything off the internet legally" world ever came true, we'd all be watching LOTR with midgets and a C budget.”
I can summarize them as “how would you like the brand new world with widespread filesharing?” I am not going to answer this question. My posts were NOT about FEELINGS, they were about my vision of the future. As a scientist I don’t let my feelings interfere with my analysis and conclusions. I may not like the future I see as well, but I’m not going to b*tch about it.

As you mentioned you preferred BT-sl*t arguments. I can see why. Both of you stayed within the legal framework. (I actually found some his arguments weak but I’m not going to be anal about it here.) My arguments, on the other hand, are purely philosophical, they are not about the law, they are above the law.

Ok, now to the point. What I wanted to say was

1. Many people perceive it to be normal to share stuff on the Internet.

Sharing existed before the advent of the hi-speed Internet. We all copied CDs we borrowed from friends but the Internet has dramatically amplified that behavior. Everybody knows that copying CDs is illegal but people still think it’s normal.

Yes, there’re laws against piracy but they were created to fight those who actually sell somebody else’s work for profit.

As I said people’s behavior is determined by what they think is right and wrong, not by the laws. Most people don’t even know the laws. Have you read all the laws pass by the Congress? Have you read any? Just one?

(You suggested that if not the laws people would kill each other in the streets. This is a very wrong statement. First, the laws don’t seem to stop people from killing each other now. And the murder statistics doesn’t seem to correlate with the strictness of the punishment. However, the issue of homicide is too complex to discuss it here. I will refer you to zoopsychology textbooks and give you a hint here: animals (except for monkeys and rats) don’t kill each other although they don’t have any laws).

A good example of what happens when people think that the law is unjust is the “Boston Tea Party”. Was it against the law? Yes. Did it hurt somebody? Of course. But now people think it was so cool that they even dedicated a museum to that event.

http://www.bostonteapartyship.com/
http://campus.northpark.edu/history/Web ... Party.html


And again I don’t claim that the majority of the population shares stuff on the internet. I just claim that the majority doesn’t think it’s wrong.

2. Obviously, this trend is going to monetarily hurt the recording, movie and software industries if the stick to their current business models. And of course, that will hurt the employees too.

Similar precedents happened in human history many times. For example, introduction of machines in the textile industry in the early 19th century, caused temporary unemployment and created the infamous the luddite movement. You’d probably ask me: “How would you feel if it was your farther/brother/cousin who lost his job?”. I’d say:”It’d suck”. But let me ask you: “ Do you really want to go back to manual manufacturing?” Or maybe we should just get rid of the Internet.

I think the entertainment industry will be shifting towards computer games in the future. The revenues of the movie industry have been steadily going down recently. I think the computer game industry has already surpassed the movie industry in terms of revenue. You can’t pirate online computer games, so perhaps that is the next big thing.

3. Many people believe that the author’s right to control the distribution of his/her work is something natural, God-given. Personally, I don’t have any problem with that. But I clearly see that with the advent of the Internet nobody can control the distribution of information in digital form. Basically the copyright law becomes unenforceable in that area. Surely RIAA is trying to scare the sh*t out of people but it’s still a drop in bucket.

So my conclusions are
-The copyright laws are irrelevant. Because first,it’s impossible to catch all “violators” and impossible to prosecute them (not enough judges, courtrooms and prisons);second, if they really try to enforce people will revolt. Those people who share stuff on the internet also have a right to vote.
-the entertainment industry will have to change to survive.

lordruin
Posts: 7
Joined: May 5th, '04, 14:45
Location: england

Post by lordruin » May 30th, '04, 13:41

Everybody knows that copying CDs is illegal but people still think it’s normal.
???

Everyone has a legal right to make a backup copy of their cd's whether software, music, etc. Sony and Microsoft lost court cases on this issue.
Now, they try to make it impossible for you to make a copy - this is why there are still legal arguments about hacking the copy protection of Dvd's.
Unfortunately, although the law says you can make a copy, it doesn't say that the merchandisers have to make it easy :(
No man is an island

lordruin
Posts: 7
Joined: May 5th, '04, 14:45
Location: england

Post by lordruin » May 30th, '04, 13:47

Everybody knows that copying CDs is illegal but people still think it’s normal.
???

Everyone has a legal right to make a backup copy of their cd's whether software, music, etc. Sony and Microsoft lost court cases on this issue.
Now, they try to make it impossible for you to make a copy - this is why there are still legal arguments about hacking the copy protection of Dvd's.
Unfortunately, although the law says you can make a copy, it doesn't say that the merchandisers have to make it easy :(
No man is an island

jholic
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 2984
Joined: Feb 3rd, '04, 19:53
Location: missin' hawaii

Post by jholic » Jun 3rd, '04, 06:37

ad: thanks for the post. i thought your ideas and perspective was represented much better than your previous posts. i don't agree with all of it, but what i find ironic is that you and i probably agree on more issues than we originally thought.
ad wrote:Everybody knows that copying CDs is illegal but people still think it’s normal.
And again I don’t claim that the majority of the population shares stuff on the internet. I just claim that the majority doesn’t think it’s wrong.
contradictory. but it sums up what i have been saying all along. we know this is wrong, but we do it anyways. the TRUE reason this is being done is because this ALTERNATIVE is available to us, and there is still a relatively LOW RISK OF GETTING CAUGHT.

also, i disagree that the MAJORITY of the population believes that filesharing isn't wrong (especially if they understand what it is). however, i will give you this. a large part of the population may not care, may agree that our actions were brought upon by insane prices, OR may want to join us if they knew how. i don't know about the MAJORITY (150 Million) - but perhaps a considerable amount.

ad wrote:2. Obviously, this trend is going to monetarily hurt the recording, movie and software industries if the stick to their current business models. And of course, that will hurt the employees too.
your previous posts did not seem to reflect this, but i agree with you. i also agree with your examples, and i want to point out some of my own. back when audio tapes and vhs tapes were more proliferant, there were illegal copies being made as well. as you pointed out, the laws were existent, but not madly enforced. also, copies of audio/vhs tapes were pretty crappy - and you stood to ruin the original.

with the advent of the internet and broadband, why has this suddenly changed? do i really need to answer this question for you? many teens seem to have more pirated things than legal ones. although p2p and filesharing has been around for many years, broadband has made it much more popular. and the RIAA/MPAA has started to crack down.

ad wrote:Basically the copyright law becomes unenforceable in that area. Surely RIAA is trying to scare the sh*t out of people but it’s still a drop in bucket.

So my conclusions are
-The copyright laws are irrelevant. Because first,it’s impossible to catch all “violators” and impossible to prosecute them (not enough judges, courtrooms and prisons);second, if they really try to enforce people will revolt. Those people who share stuff on the internet also have a right to vote.
-the entertainment industry will have to change to survive.
trust me, the laws are quite enforceable there. it would be silly for me to compare how many cases the RIAA/MPAA has won vs how many they have lost.

agreed. it will be difficult to catch all violators, but do you think that the more p2p becomes proliferant, the less they'll try to stop it?!? you should also realize that many of these cases have been settled out of court w/o judges, etc. many of them have simply paid the fines - because, as i reiterate, they knew they were wrong, and this time they got caught.

also agreed. the entertainment industry will have to change, but it may not be the kind of change us p2p users will like. i see this transforming into a cat and mouse game, kind of like virus vs antivirus, hackers vs security, etc. and just like those people, it will always be illegal. the more proliferant p2p becomes, the harder the RIAA/MPAA will fight. it will just be a question of how many people get caught. and whether the people left will want to continue doing it.

User avatar
dofuagedashi
Posts: 14
Joined: Dec 24th, '03, 19:12
Location: The Big Apple

This must be a record for the longest Proxy post!!

Post by dofuagedashi » Jun 3rd, '04, 07:59

Problem: Make J-addict site or not.
Answer: NO :-( :cry:

Looks like problem's solved already...

Hocine
Posts: 8
Joined: Oct 11th, '04, 23:03

Post by Hocine » Oct 13th, '04, 15:45

So what's the status of this?

User avatar
geoffropuff
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 118
Joined: Dec 10th, '03, 09:33

Post by geoffropuff » Oct 13th, '04, 16:02

all of the movie torrents that used to be here were moved to fantastic super club.

hegora
Posts: 7
Joined: Mar 28th, '04, 02:26
Location: quebec, canada

Post by hegora » Oct 19th, '04, 18:51

IM FOR IT!!!!!! IT will be soooooooooo great to have a j-addict site :D

ill help anytime !!!

Ruroshin
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 1174
Joined: Dec 6th, '03, 00:57

Post by Ruroshin » Oct 19th, '04, 23:48

This topic still alive? There will be no j-addicts at least not run by me.

locking.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest