I think the real question here is: why are the police wasting their time in petty crimes such as pedophilia, money scams, terrorist and assassination plans on the web, etc, when they should be trying to crack down on them pirates!
"Some things don't belong to you, and its not in your rights to share them. Some things should be taken down.
This is not one of those cases however."
And the burden of proof should lie on those that make the claim that "your video should be taken down", not getting basically a FREE "take it down" pass and then leaving the entire burden of defense to the, in many cases, rightful owner of the video.
It's like making it illegal to take away a person's freedom (say, not locking him in your basement) but instead leaving the door unlocked, taping a hair to the door to detect unauthorized entry, and then claim that if the person inside breaks the hair, he's "circumventing security measures" and thus breaking the law.
Wrong, as each additional item (hood, special box set) costs an additional amount of resources (plastic, man hours, cardboard, shipping). So 100 items cost 100x these resources, and a million items cost one million times these resources.
Any "pirate" that wants to "copy" them face two problems: 1) the actual ability to perfectly replicate the goods (which may not be possible for example for: autographed box sets) and 2) spending money on infrastructure and raw materials.
None of this applies to digital goods, since duplicating an item goes like this: "copy a -> b"
Since, for example, a music disc that has no additional value (reason to buy) except for the 0s and 1s it contains, it is not the plastic in the disc that the "infringers" want, it is the music, which can be copied endlessly at negligible cost.
"The logical fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options. Closely related are failing to consider a range of options and the tendency to think in extremes, called black-and-white thinking."
On the post: Hurt Locker Producer Says That Criticizing His Plan To Sue Fans Means You're A Moron And A Thief
Re: Black Kettle
It just means that the "copier" himself is not paying for the movie, which was his choice all along anyway.
On the post: Hurt Locker Producer Says That Criticizing His Plan To Sue Fans Means You're A Moron And A Thief
Re: Re: Been There, Done That
On the post: Hurt Locker Producer Says That Criticizing His Plan To Sue Fans Means You're A Moron And A Thief
Re: You're Missing a Point...
Oh, you won't? Help! Police! Feels like theft!
On the post: Hurt Locker Producer Says That Criticizing His Plan To Sue Fans Means You're A Moron And A Thief
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Swedish Police Say Anti-Piracy Law Has Harmed Ability To Catch Criminals
Re: Re:
Doesn't sound sufficiently derogatory to me! How about, let's call them... zombie ninja vikings.
On the post: Swedish Police Say Anti-Piracy Law Has Harmed Ability To Catch Criminals
On the post: Pirate Party Starts Hosting The Pirate Bay
Re:
On the post: Wired Takes On The Smartphone Patent Thicket And How It Stifles Innovation
Re:
On the post: Air Force PS3 Supercomputer Screwed By Sony Killing Off Linux Support
Re:
On the post: Viacom Still Not Getting It -- Files Bogus Takedown And Kills Some Free Transformers Buzz
Re: Re: Re:
This is not one of those cases however."
And the burden of proof should lie on those that make the claim that "your video should be taken down", not getting basically a FREE "take it down" pass and then leaving the entire burden of defense to the, in many cases, rightful owner of the video.
On the post: Can Someone Explain Why Circumvention For Non-Infringing Purposes Is Illegal?
Re: Catch-22
On the post: Brief In Viacom/YouTube Trial Tries To Rewrite The DMCA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Lawsuit Questions Whether Or Not Second Life Users Really 'Own' Their Virtual Land
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Any "pirate" that wants to "copy" them face two problems: 1) the actual ability to perfectly replicate the goods (which may not be possible for example for: autographed box sets) and 2) spending money on infrastructure and raw materials.
None of this applies to digital goods, since duplicating an item goes like this: "copy a -> b"
Since, for example, a music disc that has no additional value (reason to buy) except for the 0s and 1s it contains, it is not the plastic in the disc that the "infringers" want, it is the music, which can be copied endlessly at negligible cost.
And that is why you fail economics forever.
On the post: Why IT Security Guys Now Also Need To Be Legal Experts
Re:
On the post: Students Who Caught Gym Teacher Stealing Money From Lockers May Get Punished
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: As Murdoch Puts Times Online Behind A Paywall, Competitors Happily Plan To Stay Free
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Bill Would Extend DMCA-Style Takedowns To 'Personal Info'
Re: Re: Re: Has a use...
On the post: Avatar Sees Theater Attendance Bump After DVD Release
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Insignificant rise
On the post: F5 Doesn't Like A10's Name -- But Sues Over Patents, Not Trademarks
On the post: Nina Paley: My Decision To Turn Down Netflix Due To DRM
Re:
Next >>