6 ms·
Correct: it's copyright infringement, not theft.
by Manuel_D 4mo ago
Correct: it's copyright infringement, not theft.
- danpalmer 4mo agoWhich is on the side of the distributor, not the end recipient.
- Manuel_D 4mo agoFor streaming yes, but downloads are still copyright infringement on the part of the downloader. An unauthorized copy is being made on the recipient's machine. It's true that copyright holders rarely pursue cases against individuals, and tend to focus on distributors though.
- VohuMana 4mo agoHave there been any cases since the Meta ruling with the books they torrented? If I understood it right they argued and won that they didn’t seed any of the torrents so is fair use and the judge agreed. That case made it seem like as long as you don’t seed/distribute the copyrighted material then it is legal
- Manuel_D 4mo agoIt's quite clearly explained on the wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_aspects_of_file_sharing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_aspects_of_file_sharing > In the case of file sharing networks, companies claim that peer-to-peer file sharing enables the violation of their copyrights. File sharing allows any file to be reproduced and redistributed indefinitely. Therefore, the reasoning is that if a copyrighted work is on a file sharing network, whoever uploaded or downloaded the file is liable for violating the copyright because they are reproducing the work without the authorization of the copyright holder or the law. Both uploading and downloading is a violation. All the major cases are against distributors, because those are the big fish. But rights holders have gone after individuals: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/litigation-campaign-quietly-targets-tens-63769/ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/lit...
- iAMkenough 4mo agoIt’s too bad the judge told rights holders to forget about it when Meta violates copyright.
- rolph 4mo agostreaming is downloading, otherwise it wouldnt be visible on your hardware. if you pay for a stream and the distributor downloads it to your buffer, the only thing preventing it from persisting is wrapping the data to contain it in a file structure. if we really want to split hairs, everytime the data is accessed a streams bits are copied into registers, but those bits have no identity beyond 1 or 0 if you dont distribute this to others or brag on a forum about all your streams, no one will even know.
- Manuel_D 4mo agoThe argument is that it doesn't create another copy, so it's more analogous to receiving a broadcast. Like, if a pirate radio station plays copyrighted music, then the mere act of receiving those signals isn't a copyright violation. But recording that broadcast would be.
- Telaneo 4mo ago> But recording that broadcast would be. Is this seriously true in the US? I doubt this is the case in any European jurisdiction. Recording radio and TV is legal in any other case (the relevant companies didn't want that to be the case either, but we hadn't yet fallen far enough down the hole yet for that possibility to disappear). To make another comparison: You record House on your Tivo = Legal (you now have a file you can play anywhere (barring DRM, but libre DVRs exist), you've copied it) You 'record' House on Netflix (either literally with OBS or just capturing the video stream via some other means) = Illegal The only difference is the source. The actual video stream could be functionally identical. There's the fact that actual TV and radio isn't on-demand, but that to me is just an implementation detail, and not an inherent reason to treat them differently (then again, I'm not deep into the mindset of defending copyright).
- secretsatan 4mo agoI believe this is the current situation in switzerland, plus, the swiss have a tv license you have to pay if you have anything that could show media digitally so i feel doubly justified pirating things.
- rcxdude 4mo agoHas this line of argument actually held up in court, though?
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- gmerc 4mo agoWe all just need to compress them into LLM weights.
- perching_aix 4mo agoFinally the non-existing scenes I thought have "disappeared" from the movies I've seen could make a reappearance!
- pixel_popping 4mo agoSir Dario, we already swallowed the whole internet.
- riffraff 4mo agoBut the point is the movie industry has been trying to tell us that it is stealing. "You wouldn't still a car" etc etc..