3 ms·
I’m sorry: are you arguing that travelling is piracy? The upside is that we are getting closer to what piracy actually is (taking a boat by means violence) as
by bertil 13y ago
I’m sorry: are you arguing that travelling is piracy?
The upside is that we are getting closer to what piracy actually is (taking a boat by means violence) as opposed to the over-dramatised and legally void attempt by the MPAA to call unlicensed use of media something else; the downside is that you fail to notice that the idea of jurisdiction isn’t really nearly as plain as what most “hurr-Heer-Merica!” lawyers and military hawks like to thing.
- waps 13y agoI am arguing that you signed(/agreed) a contract with netflix. Second, in order to actually watch the content you have to licence it. This next bit is only 90% accurate, but will do for this discussion : that licence is another contract that at some point (probably as part of the netflix contract signing) you saw and agreed to follow. The difference between both contracts is the other party. In the first it's netflix, in the second it's the copyright owner. Both contracts stipulate that you won't look at the content outside of a given service area. You then proceed to a) violate the actual provision (contract violation / copyright violation) b) use technical means to fool the other contracting party into thinking you haven't violated the contract (fraud) Not following the terms of a licence, that's exactly what piracy is (gets more complex if there are multiple licences for the same content, but ...). Just like fraud is nothing more or less than deceiving parties you've contracted with into believing you're respecting the contract, with intent to violate said contract.