| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
Capn (0)
|
Not knowingly.
Cap'n. :0/
|
04-28-14 10:29am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
badandy400 (0)
|
It really depends on where the line is drawn. If you have gone to any tube sites you have technically violated someones copyrights.
|
04-28-14 01:46pm
Reply To Message
|
3
|
LPee23 (0)
|
Like badandy400 said, it depends on where the line is drawn. In my first, somewhat controversial post on this forum, I mentioned that I had obtained the content of a couple of sites that had been closed for years from someone who uploaded it for free. Granted, this was after first trying to join the sites, finding out that they were closed, trying to track down the owners with the intent of buying their old content at a large premium, and failing. This is either borderline piracy or piracy according to the various replies that I received on this particular post. I had no bad intent though, made no negative impact, and actually really wanted to pay for what I got.
|
04-28-14 02:37pm
Reply To Message
|
4
|
graymane (Suspended)
|
The way I see it, monitoring, and/or going after general copyright violators has got to be one of the more classic, monumental exercises in futility as is any other, or anywhere else on the net.
It's so pervasive, having lost it's scare-tactics, all it subtly gets anymore is the perennial lip-service ......much of which is from die-hard hanger-on's who still throw out all that threating legalize in their "terms of acceptance" as well as other similar sundry threats.
Like badandy, and Lpee allude to .....uploads to tube sites, and the like, proliferate at such astounding volume everywhere that the shock-values has gone the way of penny-loafers.
|
04-28-14 06:12pm
Reply To Message
|
5
|
LPee23 (0)
|
The other thing that I will add is this. There was a time in the early 2000's when scams and shady billing practices were much more pervasive on paysites, and many got a bad name for it. That type of thing angered customers, and probably encouraged piracy. Nowadays, almost every site I've been to is just trying to do honest good work for their customers. On the other hand, judging by the prevalence of piracy today, many customers haven't changed their mindset. The owners really seem to occupy the moral high ground now, and maybe it's time for those who still resort to piracy to seriously reexamine your ways.
|
04-28-14 06:55pm
Reply To Message
|
6
|
turboshaft (0)
|
Though I usually take a certain pleasure in declining to answer such questions I will say "Maybe, maybe not" on this one. :-)
I have watched stuff in groups that might have been just large enough to constitute an "exhibition purpose" that I don't think (legally) bought/downloaded content is allowed for--of course I had no idea if this was ripped or copied stuff in the first place.
If you ever look into the legalese surrounding buying/downloading/renting content it's actually pretty restricted. You don't actually own the content, just a license to personally view your copy, not show it to a big group and definitely not to make money off of it.
Performers probably have it much worse though, as I doubt most of them even own a little if any of their content, and probably have to sign away ownership of it for all space and time before the cameras even start rolling (seriously, appearance releases can read like something that an astronomer had to be consulted on).
|
04-28-14 08:37pm
Reply To Message
|
7
|
messmer (Disabled)
|
Back in the days when everyone subscribed to the usenet I downloaded quite a bit from the binaries groups without qualms about possible copyright infringements. Most of us felt entitled to the material because we paid for the subscription to the news servers! And the posters themselves were basically sharing their porn for free with others of similar taste without thought of making money from their activities. I still maintain that this was not entirely detrimental to the various pay sites because porn from the binary groups led me to the legitimate owners in my search for more, similar material. This was years ago, of course, as the usenet is now practically dead except for spam coming out of Russia.
|
04-28-14 10:46pm
Reply To Message
|
8
|
RustyJ (Suspended)
|
REPLY TO #2 - badandy400 :
Well, the technicality depends on where you live also. Copyrights are legal matters, not absolute in anyway. Also major studios themselves use tube sites as advertising. Is watching those shorter, low res clips with links to the join pages somehow questionable?
|
04-29-14 04:06am
Reply To Message
|
9
|
badandy400 (0)
|
One way to look at it is would you have actually paid for the content if that was the only method of getting it. Lpee said he wanted to pay for something and got it for free, so yes that is true piracy. Now I wont knock him because the site was shut down thus ending any profit the owners would have made. Willing and unable to equate to not willing to in reality. I personally would help pay for a lawyer for anyone sued by the people at incrediblepass if they stole their stuff. The stole a lot of money from me through their credit card fraud. You can find that story with a 5 second search of this site. I have a ton of stuff that I would never pay for. If it came to deleting it or paying I would delete without second thought. That said, I have paid for a lot of my stuff too and never reviewed a site that did not get my money first.
If you really look into the laws for copyrights you have all broken them and if you are in the USA can be charged criminally and civilly. Lets say you go and download a song. You paid for the song. Technically you can only have one copy of the song. The second the download completes you are breaking the law because you have more than one copy of it. One is in the download directory and the other is stored by your browser. This specifically came up during a lawsuit a few years ago and the person did lose the case. They had to pay the record company some stupid amount of money because of it.
|
04-29-14 02:14pm
Reply To Message
|
10
|
Jay G (Disabled)
|
I really try to pay for content. Producers of content deserve my support. Those who do not give good service & value to consumers, however, I have little use for. The harder they try to cheat customers the more I sympathize with those who go over the line regarding so called intellectual property issues.
The ultimate abuse of intellectual property only puts the law into public disrepute. Such laws would have prevented the match from being invented to light fires because the court order would claim that those who rubbed two sticks together had invented friction and therefore the use of the match should be illegal.
|
05-01-14 02:58am
Reply To Message
|
11
|
Tree Rodent (0)
|
Over the line and kept on running - bit like Forrest Gump.
|
05-01-14 06:25am
Reply To Message
|
