Gryph Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/27/technology...kster/index.htm The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that software companies can be held liable for copyright infringement when individuals use their technology to download songs and movies illegally. The unanimous decision handed the music and movie industries a crucial victory in their ongoing battle to curb Internet piracy -- a campaign centered on lobbying for new laws, filing thousands of lawsuits against Internet users, and winning a ruling from the nation's highest court. More info about the case: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...BUGISDEKVB1.DTL This is what the Supreme Court had to say: "One who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright... is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties using the device, regardless of the device's lawful uses." The most important part of that statement is the word "promoting." That could possibly have lots of loopholes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agozer Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 Not this crap again... I want to excercise my right to use software that allows me to abuse legal loopholes. I don't think the developers of these software have ever promoted their program as a tool for copyright infringment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elazul Yagami Posted June 27, 2005 Share Posted June 27, 2005 This is what the Supreme Court had to say: "One who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright... is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties using the device, regardless of the device's lawful uses." The most important part of that statement is the word "promoting." That could possibly have lots of loopholes.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Eh, VCR anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 Has the supreme court been paid well for this decision? I thought it is supposed to be the land of the free, where you can say and do whatever you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agozer Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I thought it is supposed to be the land of the free, where you can say and do whatever you want.Sadly, such freedom is an illusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weirdy Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 (edited) I thought it is supposed to be the land of the free, where you can say and do whatever you want.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Sadly, such freedom is an illusion.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>FOR FUUCK SAKE! HOW MANY TIMES MUST I EXPLAIN IT?! ok, I will explain it ooooooooooooone more fuucken time I don't mean to sound like devil's advocate anymore, but you have to remember that with every action there is a reaction. There are consequences for everything you do. You have the right to go out and dooooo whaaaaatever the fuuck you want, but someone else has as much the right to stop you, and you have the right to defend yourself against that if it's ureasonable or infringing upon your right to do that thing. It's all just a game of volleyball In this case you have the right to download stuff illegally for free, while businesses have the right to defend their product from being "stolen" or "pirated" or distributed w/out their consent\ get it? Edited June 28, 2005 by Weirdy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sybarite Paladin AxL Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 where'd you copy+paste that from?! no really! I have the right to download stuff illegally for free?! that's a good one... when piracy becomes legal then I'll have the right to do so, until then I rather just get stuff illegally and piss on yer corrupt america... supreme court, my battle axe!! MPIAA and RIAA have basically ownmarket shares in the supreme court... it's theirs to control... PIRACY does NOT (as in negative) cause millions of dollars of copyright damage for flock's sake already, it's just that flocking greedy companies don't get more money, that's what it's flocking all about, it really does not affect that respective company... lets think of it this way, if piracy would cause 50million$ of damage to EA each year, sooner or later it would go into submission, cuz we all know EA's games have been pirated alot more and on a different pace then other game companies, simply because EA mass-produces and distributes with the speed of light (yes, EA games are crap, clone after clone) for every console or handheld or pc... they should be dead by now considering the money damage damage piracy is supposed to do, but they aren't!!! Why?! BECAUSE PIRACY DOES NOT AFFECT THEM!!!! THEY JUST WANT MORE MONEY!!! And while America and 90% of the rest of the world live in a conformist consumer society, where everything (cough * everyone *cough) can be bought, that will NOT change... There's no such thing as a free country, only countries that are enslaved by dictators and countries that are given an illusion of freedom by a dictatorship... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weirdy Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 *sigh* no, you don't get it and I did not copy and paste that it came pure out of fact cause...that's what it is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agozer Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I thought it is supposed to be the land of the free, where you can say and do whatever you want.Sadly, such freedom is an illusion.FOR FUUCK SAKE! HOW MANY TIMES MUST I EXPLAIN IT?! ok, I will explain it ooooooooooooone more fuucken time I don't mean to sound like devil's advocate anymore, but you have to remember that with every action there is a reaction. There are consequences for everything you do. You have the right to go out and dooooo whaaaaatever the fuuck you want, but someone else has as much the right to stop you, and you have the right to defend yourself against that if it's ureasonable or infringing upon your right to do that thing. It's all just a game of volleyball In this case you have the right to download stuff illegally for free, while businesses have the right to defend their product from being "stolen" or "pirated" or distributed w/out their consent\ get it?What the hell is wrong with you? I know exactly what you mean, I didn't ask you to explain anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dooz Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 There is no such thing as freedom in this world, but at least we're trying. But god damn, we were doing jsut fine before the Supreme Court started to take a dump on the pirating industry. The reason I pirate software is because I simply cannot afford to pay for the crap I download. If I could pay for it, I would. So really, they aren't losing money from me because I was never a potential customer. So just let me have my fun and stop interfering with my life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 A lot of stuff simply isn't available in my country, if we want something we have to copy it from somewhere. It's the fault of the corporations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now