Printable View
Hey Lv4
I was very specific about "piracy" :D
You see, years ago we abolished the death penalty over here apart from:
1. High Treason
2. Arson in Her Majesty's Dockyards
3. Endangering the Royal Succession
4. Piracy on the high seas
I am not sure about #4, but I suppose that you are OK at least up to the 12 mile limit?
:xbones: :D
"Arrrgh Jim lad, that be Allardyce; he had blonde hair"
Despite all the piracy confusion I would still like to support RCGreen's proposal for beheading Oprah...
Everyone in favor say... "aye" ;)
Convention of the High SeasQuote:
Piracy consists of any of the following acts:
(1) Any illegal acts of violence, detention or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:
(a) On the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;
(b) Against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;
(2) Any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;
(3) Any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in sub-paragraph 1 or sub-paragraph 2 of this article.
This is the proper use for the term"piracy", all others is just plain theft, even Pirates have "Morals".... :p (and feelings)
Oh and "Aye"...... :cool:
I really tossed and turned over replying, and I'm probably just biting on the hook with the worm on it....
Quote:
Originally posted here by dalek
That is where I lose all sympathy, for the RIAA/MPAA, they will spend thousands to prosecute a child to make a point, yet the countries you listed nihil,..... aggressively blackmarket this stuff, it's huge dollars for these countries....we can't be that naive to think that those in Gov't in Russia don't turn a blind eye (when wallet gets filled), this country is responsible for most of the Spyware and Phishing sites that pollute the internet on a daily basis.
Why does this make you lose sympathy for the RIAA/MPAA? Some third party is not playing fair, and you blame it on the RIAA/MPAA?
Are you seriously expecting two businesses to change numerous foreign governments? Seriously?Quote:
Originally posted here by dalek
So when the RIAA/MPAA start making inroads into prosecuting the Chinese (not) Russian (not) Africans (not) and India (not), then I will support them 100%, until then it's only 75%... ;)
Awwww, it's not fair, everyone is picking on me, boo hoo hoo. Are you trying to justify theft / piracy / copywrite infringement using the "But Tommy is doing it, why can't I"? How about the classic response... If those people breaking the rules without backlash all jumped off a bridge, would you too?Quote:
Originally posted here by dalek
It's one thing to insist only we must adhere to their rules, and yet other's don't without some sort of backlash, and that's why cycnism runs rampant when people download, it's like thumbing their noses.
It might remind you of "those days", but it has nothing to do with this topic.Quote:
Originally posted here by dalek
Reminds me of the day's when the cops would go all crazy to bust a person for a couple of joints and the pusher/dealer walked, if you want the users to stop then cut off the supply, cause as long as there is a demand there will always be someone willing to supply....
Quote:
Are you seriously expecting two businesses to change numerous foreign governments? Seriously?
RIAAQuote:
Important Strides For Other Nations -- Brazil, Taiwan and Pakistan Strengthen Anti-Piracy Efforts
WASHINGTON, DC – [The International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA), on behalf of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), the Business Software Alliance (BSA) and other copyright associations, today filed a report with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) outlining intellectual property protection concerns in 68 different nations. The groups’ report, submitted as part of the so-called “Special 301” process where the federal government annually reviews whether the efforts of foreign governments to protect intellectual property are adequate, again asks USTR to designate Russia as a Priority Foreign Country (PFC). Such a designation could lead to the imposition of trade sanctions. Below is a comment from the RIAA’s Neil Turkewitz, Executive Vice President, International.]
“This filing underscores the importance that the U.S. copyright industries attach to the need for radical reform in Russia. Russia has emerged in recent years as one the world’s leading producers and exporters of pirate discs. The Russian government has failed to respond appropriately to this open lawlessness. Many of the plants currently producing pirate product are actually located on government premises – a form of tacit government involvement that we have not witnessed since China in the mid-1990s.
“We hope that recent comments by President Putin suggest that Russian law enforcement officials will soon undertake serious, immediate action to curb rampant intellectual property theft.
“There are some promising signals, but for the moment, there is little doubt that Russia fails to provide effective protection as required under international obligations. We strongly encourage USTR to designate Russia as a ‘Priority Foreign Country’ and to move quickly to remove Russia’s eligibility for specific trade benefits. Congress has repeatedly made clear that support for most favored nation trade status will not be forthcoming unless this situation is adequately resolved. We hope that the Russian government will promptly address the inadequacies in its enforcement regime that impede its entry into the WTO.
Hope you didn't break anything when you tossed and turned... :D
Generalisation.. A principle, statement, or idea having general application. was I talking about me....Quote:
Awwww, it's not fair, everyone is picking on me, boo hoo hoo. Are you trying to justify theft / piracy / copywrite infringement using the "But Tommy is doing it, why can't I"? How about the classic response... If those people breaking the rules without backlash all jumped off a bridge, would you too?
The "principle" is the same, wether it is "drugs" or MP3's or whatever else law enforcement go after, my point was they target the "minnows" instead of going after the "sharks" and it is on-topic...Quote:
It might remind you of "those days", but it has nothing to do with this topic.
I saved this for last:
Because I fe*cking want to....no...oh okay, if these organisations applied the same rules to everyone then it would be a level playing field, don't think it's just RIAA/MPAA, each country has an associate industry which goes hand in hand with the RIAA/MPAA and in some cases let's them take the lead in going after major downloaders in foreign countries, when they manage to get cooperation.Quote:
Why does this make you lose sympathy for the RIAA/MPAA? Some third party is not playing fair, and you blame it on the RIAA/MPAA?
Quote:
I didn't say you were talking about you, I was address your "compassionate understanding" of why others download illegal items.
I disagree. The "law enforcement" is not targeting only the minnows. They are also wrongly targeting the P2P application creators. I think it's wrong that Napster was shut down because people were using it illegally, and against the wishes of the creator. It's not on-topic, because the analogy doesn't apply to the topic. Sorry.Quote:
Originally posted here by dalek
The "principle" is the same, wether it is "drugs" or MP3's or whatever else law enforcement go after, my point was they target the "minnows" instead of going after the "sharks" and it is on-topic...
Interesting that your link above proves beyond a doubt just how the RIAA and MPAA are doing just what you want them to do. And yet you finish the same post by saying the businesses are NOT applying the same rules to everyone. Which is it? I'm lost now.Quote:
Originally posted here by dalek
I saved this for last:
Because I fe*cking want to....no...oh okay, if these organisations applied the same rules to everyone then it would be a level playing field, don't think it's just RIAA/MPAA, each country has an associate industry which goes hand in hand with the RIAA/MPAA and in some cases let's them take the lead in going after major downloaders in foreign countries, when they manage to get cooperation.
Then what do you consider, with all of the resources available to RIAA/MPAA and the prosecuter's targetting 12 yr olds? who probably get a couple of bucks allowance...why is it we very rarely read where they are going to take on a major University because of all the downloading that goes on with these places, or better yet the people who are obviously (through the major use of bandwidth) downloading to sell on the blackmarket (the ISP's know who these people are as they cut them off because of bandwidth abuse).My analogy may have been lame, but it is still relevant, the biggest will always go after the smallest....Quote:
I disagree. The "law enforcement" is not targeting only the minnows. They are also wrongly targeting the P2P application creators. I think it's wrong that Napster was shut down because people were using it illegally, and against the wishes of the creator. It's not on-topic, because the analogy doesn't apply to the topic. Sorry.
Correct, the RIAA/MPAA are trying to insinuate themselves into foreign affairs by forcing politicians to play hardball with these countries, and to me that's okay, when you say businesses do you mean the organisations of RIAA/MPAA or someone else, I am not sure where it is your lost..if it is the RIAA/MPAA you are referring to, then yes, they are not applying the same rules to everyone, as you said Napster were targetted, unfairly for it's users, so was a couple of other's Kazaa, Emule etc. But as you can see there are quite a few options still available for people to install a P2P and download copyrighted material. ;)Quote:
Interesting that your link above proves beyond a doubt just how the RIAA and MPAA are doing just what you want them to do. And yet you finish the same post by saying the businesses are NOT applying the same rules to everyone. Which is it? I'm lost now.
Quote:
Originally posted here by dalek
Then what do you consider, with all of the resources available to RIAA/MPAA and the prosecuter's targetting 12 yr olds? who probably get a couple of bucks allowance...why is it we very rarely read where they are going to take on a major University because of all the downloading that goes on with these places, or better yet the people who are obviously (through the major use of bandwidth) downloading to sell on the blackmarket (the ISP's know who these people are as they cut them off because of bandwidth abuse).My analogy may have been lame, but it is still relevant, the biggest will always go after the smallest....
I'm sorry that you haven't read about it, but the RIAA and MPAA have sued Universities in the past... Businesses too. - Here's an example...
University Suit
Try this, it might help...
Google Search
>the biggest will always go after the smallest....
No, I think the RIAA/MPAA are going after the easiest to stop. It costs them a lot of money to sue to stop an application like Napster. It's easier to get a suit against a single individual. Besides, if they went after every person downloading, probably 50% of the country would be getting served.
P2P hosts are getting shut down all the time, every day. I can't help it that you only remember the headlines of 12 yr olds being sued.
They are doing what they can to stop it. I don't think part of their business model is to sue only 12 year olds and 75 year old grandparents that live in the Bible Belt of the USA.Quote:
Originally posted here by dalek
Correct, the RIAA/MPAA are trying to insinuate themselves into foreign affairs by forcing politicians to play hardball with these countries, and to me that's okay, when you say businesses do you mean the organisations of RIAA/MPAA or someone else, I am not sure where it is your lost..if it is the RIAA/MPAA you are referring to, then yes, they are not applying the same rules to everyone, as you said Napster were targetted, unfairly for it's users, so was a couple of other's Kazaa, Emule etc. But as you can see there are quite a few options still available for people to install a P2P and download copyrighted material. ;)
hhmmm your links don't work, and it's not just because it was a 12 yr old that I remember these things, I can only put so many examples in my post, unless of course you want to see every example, I chose the 12 yr old because it does stick out, just like O.J. Simpson sticks out amongst the other 3 million murderer's....your point is????
yeah I know how to use google, I am somewhat relieved to see you do as well.... :p
That is still the bully of the playground mentality, and just because it is easier, does not make it right either, maybe if they did, place a lot of resources into taking down all of the P2P sites, instead of the little guy's, the little guy's might just get the message and stop downloading copyrighted material.....Quote:
No, I think the RIAA/MPAA are going after the easiest to stop. It costs them a lot of money to sue to stop an application like Napster. It's easier to get a suit against a single individual
Sorry, I fixed my links above. I don't really care for PHP BB Code :p
>maybe if they did, place a lot of resources into taking down all of the P2P sites, instead of the little guy's, the little guy's might just get the message and stop downloading copyrighted material.....
Again, why should the P2P sites be taken down? They are providing a service, and that service is being abused by certain users - that warrants taking them down? Should the police shut down all freeways because people speed on them? Should the DEA stop boats from being made because boats are used to transport illegal drugs? Should District Attorney file murder charges on Gun Manufacturers any time someone is killed with a gun? I'm sorry, but you seem to be all over the place here. Didn't you say earlier that Napster was wrongly shut down?
If the little guys aren't getting the message (and they're not because illegal file sharing rates are up) when they are the one's getting sued, they aren't going to get it if someone else is getting sued. Ultimately, the little guy's demand is what causes the supply. If no one wanted a copy of the latest Boys To Men song - or whatever is hot now - people wouldn't take the time to share them.
I just get steamed when I hear justifications for the activity like "OMG, they charge way too much for a CD", or "The artists don't get much money from record sales." or "Hey, people in Africa aren't getting sued." Sorry for my ranting.