The movie industry isn't that smart. Who isn't surprised.
What bothers me is that they seed the very torrents in order to catch people.
Sleazy and legally questionable.

smeezekitty wrote:

The movie industry isn't that smart. Who isn't surprised.
What bothers me is that they seed the very torrents in order to catch people.
Sleazy and legally questionable.

Yeah, that's kind of like intentionally dropping a wallet on the sidewalk then calling the police if anyone picks it up. Of course someone is going to pick it up.

Obviously those geniuses have never heard about proxy.

Wow, I better start using a VPN! Don't want to get sued.

^ Or you could just not download current music/movies/tv/games

^^

I'm in the "I'LL WAIT FOR IT ON TV" lamer camp. 🤣

Well the laws are kind of goofy. If you DVR (VCR, or any digital copy you make) a TV show that is free over the air its ok, but downloading the same TV show from a torrent is bad. I can see making a stink over premium pay channel shows but free network shows?

Those are paid for by advertisers.

Unknown_K wrote:

Well the laws are kind of goofy. If you DVR (VCR, or any digital copy you make) a TV show that is free over the air its ok, but downloading the same TV show from a torrent is bad. I can see making a stink over premium pay channel shows but free network shows?

Those "free" network shows are only "free" when they are broadcast on TV. They do sell DVD's and digital downloads of them just like movies and torrents cut into that income.

sliderider wrote:

Unknown_K wrote:

Well the laws are kind of goofy. If you DVR (VCR, or any digital copy you make) a TV show that is free over the air its ok, but downloading the same TV show from a torrent is bad. I can see making a stink over premium pay channel shows but free network shows?

Those "free" network shows are only "free" when they are broadcast on TV. They do sell DVD's and digital downloads of them just like movies and torrents cut into that income.

I am going to argue that torrents don't affect it that much. A lot of pirates wouldn't buy it anyway

smeezekitty wrote:

sliderider wrote:

Unknown_K wrote:

Well the laws are kind of goofy. If you DVR (VCR, or any digital copy you make) a TV show that is free over the air its ok, but downloading the same TV show from a torrent is bad. I can see making a stink over premium pay channel shows but free network shows?

Those "free" network shows are only "free" when they are broadcast on TV. They do sell DVD's and digital downloads of them just like movies and torrents cut into that income.

I am going to argue that torrents don't affect it that much. A lot of pirates wouldn't buy it anyway

A lot of car thieves wouldn't buy a car, either, but does that justify the theft?

A car isn't exactly composed of bits and bytes that can be replicated instantly without any effort.

jwt27 wrote:

A car isn't exactly composed of bits and bytes that can be replicated instantly without any effort. […]
Show full quote

A car isn't exactly composed of bits and bytes that can be replicated instantly without any effort.

What the object is made of is irrelevant. The copyright holder owns that particular combination of bits and bytes so regardless of how easy it is to replicate, it is still theft.

sliderider wrote:

The copyright holder owns that particular combination of bits and bytes

So technically, you could re-encode a film in a different codec and make it yours...?

Or what if you have an infinite number of monkeys on typewriters and one of them accidentally happens to recreate the exact sequence of bits and bytes that make up your favourite film?

And if you duplicated that car down to the smallest piece, have you then stolen it?
Stealing and copying is two different terminologies.
If I go to a shop and take whatever Blu-Ray disc, then I have stolen a movie.

Stealing an iPhone and copying stuff, is considered under two different laws in Denmark.
You will get prosecuted in two various ways, for these matters here.
It's just the movie industry that fill's us ordinary people with bullshit.
Copying is indeed a criminal act. It's just not theft. Thank you very much.

sliderider wrote:

What the object is made of is irrelevant. The copyright holder owns that particular combination of bits and bytes so regardless of how easy it is to replicate, it is still theft.

No, that's very relevant, and no, it's not theft. Look it up. No copyright infringer was ever found guilty of theft. The laws of physical property and the laws of copyright are different, and historically exist for different purposes.

brostenen wrote:

Stealing an iPhone and copying stuff, is considered under two different laws in Denmark. You will get procecuted in two various […]
Show full quote

Stealing an iPhone and copying stuff, is considered under two different laws in Denmark.
You will get procecuted in two various ways, for these matters here.
It's just the movie industry that fill's us ordinaery people with bullshit.
Copying is indeed a chriminal act. It's just not theft. Thank you very much.

Very succinct and accurate description, thank you.

jwt27 wrote:

sliderider wrote:

The copyright holder owns that particular combination of bits and bytes

So technically, you could re-encode a film in a different codec and make it yours...?

Or what if you have an infinite number of monkeys on typewriters and one of them accidentally happens to recreate the exact sequence of bits and bytes that make up your favourite film?

No because copyright law specifically states that the copyright holder owns the rights to their content in all formats existing now or in the future.

dr_st wrote:

No, that's very relevant, and no, it's not theft. Look it up. No copyright infringer was ever found guilty of theft. The laws of […]
Show full quote

sliderider wrote:

What the object is made of is irrelevant. The copyright holder owns that particular combination of bits and bytes so regardless of how easy it is to replicate, it is still theft.

No, that's very relevant, and no, it's not theft. Look it up. No copyright infringer was ever found guilty of theft. The laws of physical property and the laws of copyright are different, and historically exist for different purposes.

brostenen wrote:

Stealing an iPhone and copying stuff, is considered under two different laws in Denmark. You will get procecuted in two various […]
Show full quote

Stealing an iPhone and copying stuff, is considered under two different laws in Denmark.
You will get procecuted in two various ways, for these matters here.
It's just the movie industry that fill's us ordinaery people with bullshit.
Copying is indeed a chriminal act. It's just not theft. Thank you very much.

Very succinct and accurate description, thank you.

The US Congress disagrees with you, hence the title of this Act passed in 1997.

https://kb.iu.edu/d/aliv

Catchy titles aside, as far as I know, even under said act, the offenses are still considered quite distinct, and are prosecuted differently, even in the US.

But even that does not really matter. To the average person with an average moral compass, the distinction between stealing a physical item and duplicating some data without paying some copyright holder is quite real. The media industry has been hard at work trying to reshape people's thoughts on this matter, but without much success. There does not seem to be any significant slowdown of unlicensed duplication of content. Even people who are willing to put down the equality sign "copyright infringement = theft" routinely commit said infringement in various ways, in many cases without even thinking about it.