Studios Sue Oz ISP Over Allowing Piracy 400
Da Massive writes "Leading Hollywood film studios Village Roadshow, Universal Pictures, Warner Bros Entertainment, Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation and Disney Enterprises are suing Australia's second largest ISP, iiNet, saying it's complicit in the infringement of their copyrighted material. According to a statement of claim, 'the ISP knows that there are a large number of customers who are engaging in continuing infringements of copyright by using BitTorrent file sharing technology.'"
Criminal intent? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
When will shoe stores get sued for selling boots and shoes that are painful to the person receiving kicks in the ass?
Gotta remember though, they're starting in Australia, which is a good idea considering their government's attitude on the internet and the freedoms provided therein. Interesting to me that they've started there. If it works there and the government buys into it, then look for it to spread to the other overly conservative nations. (I'm looking at you Russia)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Worse than you think (Score:5, Interesting)
wait, iiNet wasn't the one actually experimenting the new Australian filtering technology? This lawsuit is a HUGE win against such filtering protection... or not? Am I missing something?
Yes, it is an indicator that iiNet is opposed to internet content filtering [pcauthority.com.au]. However, it's also an indicator to all ISP's around the world that if they do not employ filtering they risk an extremely expensive legal battle with the seven top film studios, each of which probably has more assets and prior experience in court than the ISP's.
What's strange and rather scary about this situation is that "iiNet will be participating in the trials, mostly to prove that the filters are impractical, unworkable and unwanted." [see link above] The studios are suing them not for refusing to cooperate, but for cooperating reluctantly. That's all it takes for the MAFIAA to pull the trigger it seems.
Re:Worse than you think (Score:5, Interesting)
iiNet are being sued because they didn't do anything when the film companies sent them notices that some of their customers were pirating their media. They apparently sent 18 notices [smh.com.au] and iiNet refused to do anything because they were allegations rather than court ordered actions.
To be honest, this seems quite reasonable to me, iiNet should not have to cut people off just because someone says: That guy was pirating my stuff, here is an IP and a time. The companies should go after the individual, not the ISP.
Ultimately we will see what the federal courts decide. The media companies in question have stated that if this goes well, they will continue onto other Australian ISPs.
Re:Worse than you think (Score:5, Informative)
iiNet are being sued because they didn't do anything when the film companies sent them notices that some of their customers were pirating their media. They apparently sent 18 notices and iiNet refused to do anything because they were allegations rather than court ordered actions.
But they did do something about it. They passed the allegations on to the police. That is what anyone should do. It's the police's job to investigate allegations.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
'If it works there and the government buys into it, then look for it to spread to the other overly conservative nations. (I'm looking at you Russia)'
India is already pursuing a vigorous anti-piracy policy in cases of clear criminal intent, a move that has received international approval and calls for the wider adoption of such measures:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7739171.stm [bbc.co.uk]
"The United Nations and international community must decide how to solve this grave problem (of piracy). They must be m
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:5, Insightful)
As an Australian, I find it depressing that we are now apparently perceived by the rest of the world as one of those "overly conservative nations".
What happened to our traditional spirit of rebelion? What would those who took a stand in the Eureka Stockade [wikipedia.org] think of us now?
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:5, Insightful)
They should sue the CD/DVD recorders companies, since they encourage piracy, much more than BitTorrent itself.
Sure, it's useful for doing backups ;-)
And it would probably be like shooting in oneself foot, since Sony sells DVD recorders.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I have no doubt they would have sued the CD/DVD recorder companies if the precedent hadn't already been set by their failed lawsuit against the VCR manufacturers.
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:5, Informative)
That didn't stop them. Even though they lost the Betamax case circa 1980, they still sued Digital Audio Tape (DAT) and kept it out of America. Then they tried to sue Digital Compact Cassette and Minidisc, which led to inbuilt copy protection of these devices.
They will never stop. They fear losing their jobs and that's one powerful motive.
Then they wil sue themselves (Score:3, Insightful)
Remember that SONY (grrrr) produces lots of Films./Music through its plethora of subsidiaries but also makes CD & DVD writers.
Now that I come to think of it, don't they also sell a BluRay drive capable of writing content?
They (the RIAA/MPAA/etc) lawyers are being very careful but sooner or later they are going to come a cropper. It looks like they are targetting the carriers outside of the USA who don't have 'common carrier' immunity. All they are going to do is make more and more people pissed off at e
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The argument is that safe harbour doesn't apply anymore because filtering is possible(a couple of schmucks from both sides of kazaa are selling a hash based filtering system and the government is buying it or at least pretending to). This is the general gist of the lawsuit, the guys from t
Re: (Score:2)
Deliver or shut up! (Score:4, Funny)
Until the Hollywood studios are ready, willing, and able to deliver their newest products, very inexpensively, to people living in tiny towns 700 miles northwest of Perth, they should stop hassling the people who are actually presently doing this.
Re:Deliver or shut up! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
While I agree with your sentiments, the analogy doesn't really hold up.
The hammer shop has no way of knowing what the hammer is used for, after it leaves the shop.
The ISP on the otherhand, does have the ability to know what an account is being used for, or what type of data is being sent.
A better analogy would be an airline being held responsible for the cocaine that a passenger is carrying, or a tollway operator being charged because a car on its road network is carrying illegal firearms - in effect, you'r
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:5, Insightful)
11 million users downloading patches from Blizzard for WoW, movies too. Many sites sharing demos and trailers also use bittorrent.
Just because they pretend it's a magical piracy device doesn't mean that one set of bits is somehow different then the other set of bits to the programs.
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:4, Informative)
Every version/patch I have downloaded for NeoOffice has come from Bittorrent.
Bittorrent has a plethora of legal uses.
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:5, Interesting)
When I needed AdAware to remove a nasty spybot, my bittorrent client was the only thing that worked (because the spybot was blocking browser downloads).
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:4, Funny)
(Kidding, don't use Azureus)
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:5, Insightful)
Bittorrent has a plethora of legal uses.
You know that and I know that, and I'm sure the studios actually know that, but reality clashes with their desires, so they pretend loudly that their desires ARE reality.
Truth doesn't matter in a court of law. Only what you can convince the judge and jury is truth is what matters, whether your "truths" are actually true or not.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What they are doing here is attempting to demon straight a need for the great firewall.
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:5, Informative)
IAAL, and I call BS. Truth matters plenty in court. What also matters is how skilfully you are able to demonstrate the truth to a court, and (probably most importantly) how well you are able to argue for your preferred application of the law to the 'truth' (i.e. facts).
I worked for a judge here in Australia for a year, and I do not believe he ever accepted a piece of evidence that was untrue. On the whole, I'd say we usually had a very strong understanding of the actual facts in each trial by the end of the evidence.
Incidentally, this will be a civil claim in Australia and will be heard by a judge, not a jury.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
People dont get convicted of crimes because its statistically likely that they did it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
People dont get convicted of crimes because its statistically likely that they did it.
I wonder what DNA profiling is then.
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:5, Insightful)
Riiiiight, because my client who uses Amazon S3 to originate huge software packages that are distributed over Bittorrent (a feature built into S3) is obviously committing some sort of criminal act by using the Bittorrent protocol.
Get over yourself. Next you'll outlaw fire extinguishers because I can beat someone over the head with them. Go after the crime not the tool.
Disclaimer: Personally, I think media companies have perpetrated a copyright land grab long enough. Fuck 'em.
Re: (Score:2)
>>>Go after the crime not the tool.
Would it be acceptable if I went after the RIAA CEO with a BFG? (Democratic Party Founder Thomas Jefferson says, "...the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants...")
Why waste ammo? (Score:4, Funny)
>>>Go after the crime not the tool.
Would it be acceptable if I went after the RIAA CEO with a BFG? (Democratic Party Founder Thomas Jefferson says, "...the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants...")
Well, I'd nullify if I was on the jury when you went to trial, but why waste ammo? I've got a tire iron autographed by Tonya Harding I'd be willing to lend you.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Even though guns are used for killing 90% of the time, that doesn't change the fact they are still useful. Like when I deterred a thief from stealing my car (last week) or when I rescued my girlfriend from a Philadelphia mugger (about ten years ago). Guns can save lives as well.
Same logic applies to bittorrent. Or blank tapes. Or blank CDs. Yes they are mostly used for piracy, but they also have useful purposes as well, and that's why they remain legal.
Re: (Score:2)
Try reading the WHOLE message, okay? Stupid anonymous coward.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know about american law, but atleast in Swedish law the right to Self-Defense does not extend to the right to kill. You're only allowed to use the force necessary to keep yourself safe and it's really hard to argue that killing or maiming is necessary.
The best defense is a good offense?
Kidding aside, in a fight where you need to keep yourself safe, typically the only recourse IS to kill or maim. People are animals, and if it comes down to your safety if you are in a fair fight then you are doing something wrong.
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:4, Insightful)
It depends. If you kill the murderer or thief who is engaged in the act of attacking you or endangering your safety, so be it.
But if you hold him at gunpoint, put him on his knees, and then shoot him afterward, then you, my friend, are a murderer.
This, to me, is not self defense. Self defense is you being inside your home, with a robber breaking in and trying to break down a door to get at you and your family. In which case, let him have it with both barrels, as they say.
But to force people into a submission position, train a gun
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:5, Insightful)
Excuse my Godwin, but wanting to kill the "stupid" was one of the things Hitler wanted to do....
I agree that the current "less then lethal" weapons are not terribly good at anything, they're both lethal and hard to use properly.
I'm not going to excuse that Godwin. Don't be absurd. He in no way advocated killing the stupid because they were stupid.
He said someone making the decision to steal and murder was stupid based on that decision, and the condition of being stupid wasn't why he was advocating defending himself with the most appropriate tool.
He is defending himself, that requires no further justification.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
For Bittorrent, use of the technology to do legal things like download Linux ISOs is statistically negligible.
Show me your numbers. Provide a link so that I can look at these stats too please...
Negligible! (Score:5, Funny)
F/OSS is negligible! Negligible, I tell you!
Negligible! Negligible! Negligible! Negligible!
-Steve Ballmer
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:5, Insightful)
It hasn't even been proven that all of the music / programs / movies getting downloaded are truly being pirated. Tons of people bought Spore and then downloaded cracked versions to avoid activation issues. When I used file sharing apps to get music I already owned about 90% of the stuff I was downloading. I was just too lazy to bring my CDs to work to rip them. It was easier to just DL it. Same with movies. How many people have DVD ripping software compared to how many people have bittorrent?
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:5, Insightful)
The media-entertainment sellers have made the same argument against just about every recordable media format invented. The old cassette tape almost never made it to market and several formats of digital tape never made or were relegated to professional use only applications.
For most people, the rule is that they fear what they don't understand... in media-entertainment, they fear what they can't control and that [especially] includes the consumer.
The media industry has not only been crossing the line, but they stepped over, built their homes and are living comfortably over the line. They need to be put back into their places starting with extreme copyright reform restoring the duration of copyright to something reasonable and re-establishing fair use.
Could you imagine how much more motivated the software, music and video industries would be to create better and more varied content when their old cash cows are killed off? Just the range of old software that would become public domain by itself would reveal some very useful things that could then be modified for imbedded and other uses... other uses that could also include providing access to ancient data formats that public data has been encoded in for example.
And what would prevent people from wanting to use the old stuff? Simple! Make newer and better stuff! Forget small incremental changes, not fixing ALL the bugs and all that stuff... marketing broken software as a business model [I am looking at you Microsoft] will then be defeated...or at least deterred a bit.
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:5, Interesting)
If someone today said that they could find a way of making money by giving away something broadcasting it across the planet on TV and on the net and still make people pay for it they would laughed at but this is exactly what the media companies do ...
I can pay to watch a movie, buy it on DVD, watch it on free to view TV, and it is still illegal for me to download it and watch that? I've paid twice to watch it and a company has paid you to broadcast it ... why do you still want money for it...?
Copyright is being used as a licence to print money forever by these companies...
Re:Criminal intent? (Score:4, Insightful)
So they're using the courts correctly (Score:4, Insightful)
They think something is not legal. The opposing party does not agree, so they take it to the court.
This seems to me exactly the situation where you'd want people to use the courts. Australia's a democracy. Everybody has the right to complain, and they may be right when they complain. Even Disney.
Call again when you have a verdict. Then you have actual information to report.
You keep using that word.... (Score:4, Insightful)
"This seems to me exactly the situation where you'd want people to use the courts. Australia's a democracy. Everybody has the right to complain, and they may be right when they complain. Even Disney."
What does being a democracy have to do with taking things to court?
If you wanted to talk about a democracy, you'd say that Disney (et al) would propose a law and allow every person to vote on the merits of that law.
But trying to get a ruling from a Judge instead of working with the legislature strikes me as *undemocratic*.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think what the poster parent was trying to say (perhaps unclearly) was that the fact that Australia is a democratic republic has nothing to do with a court case. Perhaps what was meant was "thank heavens Australia is a country of laws where cases are based on law and not some autocratic ruler's opinion".
Why not all the +10Mbit/s ISP's in Sweden? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why don't do this to all the ISP's in Sweden?
2.6 Million Swedes apparently pirate software, music and movies every day. That's almost 1/3rd of the populace.
They make huge profits from this but in no way are they trying to hinder the use of p2p, well some try to filter it but that doesn't help very much.
Re:Why not all the +10Mbit/s ISP's in Sweden? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why not all the +10Mbit/s ISP's in Sweden? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's only a matter of time. It will happen first in the countries who's current laws and governments make it most likely to succeed. The rest of the world will follow in due course.
Re:Why not all the +10Mbit/s ISP's in Sweden? (Score:5, Funny)
The rest of the world will follow in due course.
Ah, this explains how when I woke up this morning all countries had the death penalty, this afternoon there were no speed limits, and tomorrow I'm due to sacrifice my firstborn child after an edict from some leader of a tribe in south America. This automatic copying of laws from other countries is making life rather awkward.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
We're not talking about copying laws, we're talking about filing lawsuits, do try to pay attention. Obviously it makes sense for the studios to file such suits in the countries where they are most likely to succeed first, before filing in other countries.
Re: (Score:2)
Correct. Once they have precedent they can stand before an U.S. or EU judge and say, "We won in Australia. You should follow their decision and comply with international law," or something similar.
(Of course I've never understood why foreign law should have any influence on U.S. law - the People's Constitution is the only supreme law that should matter here. What happens elsewhere should be irrelevant.)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Brought to you by Globalism.
Globalism, when greed at home is not enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Death penalty is not being lobbied by the international media corporations.
Death penalty is not being lobbied by the international media corporations.
Sacrificing your firstborn child is not being lobbied by the international media corporations.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no economic interest behind the death penalty, no speed limits, etc.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why are you treating economic theory like it's a passage from the bible, an absolute truth that can't be questioned.
According to your theory noone would ever pay money to charity because noone is forcing them to through draconian laws.
So What? (Score:2)
So what? McDonalds also knows that there are a large number of customers who are engaging in continuing infringements of copyright by using BitTorrent file sharing technology. So does Ford. Smith and Wesson know that they have customers who engage in murder and robbery. The phone company knowingly sells phone lines and number lists to telemarke
Re: (Score:2)
Is USPS liable for mail fraud? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is USPS liable for mail fraud? (Score:5, Interesting)
As soon as the ISP's started filtering traffic they didn't like and affecting what data is on their network, they became content providers and could not ask for immunity. If they were to stop filtering/blocking/etc what goes over their tubes, they could probably ask to not be considered a content provider and then what happens on their tubes is not their fault; they would be just offering a service.
(This is how I see the US working; AU might be a tad different)
Re: (Score:2)
More challenging opponent (Score:4, Insightful)
At least they're not suing a 17 year old with a broadband connection for a change. Maybe the ISP will have enough money that they can actually make a proper fight of this. That might mean we can finally have the argument aired carefully enough the general public can hear both sides.
I agree with what somebody else said about hammers, but I don't think most people yet understand that argument. It will be great for the debate when more people do.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The reason they're not suing the 17 year old, is because iiNet has refused to pass on the infrindgement notices.
Its a civil law matter in australia, Its not up to AFAICT(our version of the MPAA/RIAA) or the ISP to determine that someone is downloading copyrighted material, The studio's need to goto the police, File a court case against the individual, Only once they're actually considered to be doing something illegal by the court can the ISP hand over personal details about the individual.
The ISP is *n
Countersue (Score:2)
Can someone sue last century fox if a psicopath starts killing people using a movie as inspiration?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure the victim's family would try if it was made common knowledge that the film was inspiration. Whether they'd get anything is another matter. It's psychopath by the way.
I had the same attitude from EA.. (Score:4, Interesting)
.. when I asked them how I could make back-ups of my games so I don't have to cause damage to the originals to install them ( some 20 odd CDs for 'The Sims 2' ). They told me I couldn't because, and I quote:
"You cannot create backup copies of the discs because this would allow a person to freely distribute copies of the game, which is something EA does not allow."
My reply was similar to some other posts here:
"I have no intention in distributing the copies, I merely wish to protect my investment by not using the original discs and therefore reduce the chance of damage to them. Denying me the ability to do that based on the _possibility_ that it can be used illegally is unfair and unjust.
By the reasoning you have displayed, knives are not permitted to be sold as they can be used to injure or kill someone ( which the law does not allow ), along with plastic bags, rope, water, scissors and plenty of other items you can find in any house. However, this is not the case."
In this case, it is "You are providing a service which allows people to do naughty things amongst other, legitimate activities. We are going to sue you."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is, you purchased the disks, and knew they where protected.
Speak with your wallet. It's all corporate understands.
No, if they put copy protection on the CD/DVD, then you cannot circumvent it, it's illegal. Don't like it, don't purchase that companies games.
Simple, really. A company has the RIGHT to put out a product they want to. They also have the right to protect that product in as much as they legally can.
Just because you don't like the delivery mechanism is no shame on them, it's more sh
Re:I had the same attitude from EA.. (Score:5, Insightful)
But try excersizing that license if your disc breaks. You can't, because it wasn't a "license," it was a copy of a game you purchased.
But you couldn't back it up? Oh, yes, because the corporation is just being legally dilligent. That must be it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How exactly do you plan to make backups of the discs without 'using' them? If you only need to have the discs in the drive to install the game and not to play it, then what difference is there? A better backup solution would be to back up the game folder after it's installed anyway, then you won't have to go through tho whole 20 disc reinstallation. You could presumably just install the base game for the appropriate registry settings (if it even needs them), and then copy back the backed up directory to get
Sue the postal service and shipping companies, too (Score:2)
For knowing that there are a large number of customers who are engaging in continuing infringements of copyright by using media-sized shipping box technology.
More carrot, less stick (Score:5, Insightful)
We'd pay to see stuff at the cinema, and own it on DVD / Blu-Ray if they'd just stop suing everybody they can find and put the money into funding good script writers and directors.
I seriously worry about how the American media industry does business nowerdays.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
We'd pay to see stuff at the cinema, and own it on DVD / Blu-Ray if they'd just stop suing everybody they can find and put the money into funding good script writers and directors.
So, by your theory, people only take stuff for free if it is crappy stuff?
They Need To Lose This Case Bad (Score:3, Interesting)
OSI model (Score:5, Interesting)
It would be in the ISP's best interests to stick to layer 3, forwarding IP packets. As soon as you start analysing and filtering them, you're doing a lot more than just being a service provider. The latest trends of demanding packet inspection and performing traffic-based throttling are really destroying the classic model of networking that the internet is based on. It's got to stop, or we'll have something that just isn't recognizable as "the internet" any longer.
If they're smart, they'll just say that inspecting traffic and disallowing certain types of packets is not in their business plan, and they don't have the capability or reason to do it. Otherwise they'll open themselves up to a lot more lawsuits down the road, from both sides of the fence. They'll find themselves having to bend over again and again for anyone asking them for pretty much anything. Instead, the right answer is, "we just forward IP packets, we don't piece them together or look at what they contain."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I hope the day never arrives I have to find a "naked" internet provider (get it? like a naked DSL line?) who I have to VPN to in order to get raw internet, because ATComcasTimeWarner deep inspects and modifies my packets.
Re: (Score:2)
It would be in the ISP's best interests to stick to layer 3, forwarding IP packets. As soon as you start analysing and filtering them, you're doing a lot more than just being a service provider. The latest trends of demanding packet inspection and performing traffic-based throttling are really destroying the classic model of networking that the internet is based on. It's got to stop, or we'll have something that just isn't recognizable as "the internet" any longer.
If they're smart, they'll just say that ins
Security Flag enforcement (Score:3, Funny)
Apparently iiNet didn't enforce the evil bit [ietf.org]
They deserved to be sued.
Re: (Score:2)
Just wondering, has anyone actually implemented this (penetration testing wares, etc) or is it just a joke RFC?
HEX
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it's been implemented in FreeBSD the day of publication of the RFC, just to be removed the day after :
Implementation [freebsd.org]
Removal [freebsd.org]
Credit : Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] ... so, yes, it's just a joke RFC (april fool's day RFC)
FYI, the IP over avian carrier RFC1149 [wikipedia.org] has also been implemented.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem being, they were to block anything with the evil bit set, they would have to block anything originating from those studios.
Because it's iiNet (Score:5, Informative)
I'd bet money that iiNet is being targeted because of this story [slashdot.org].
In other news, iiNet dropped from largest ISP to second largest ISP in Australia over the course of a week&interrobang;
Car analogy! (Score:2, Insightful)
So, for car drug transports we can sue the government for building the roads they use?
This guy is a CEO? He makes too much sense... (Score:5, Interesting)
Excellent synopsis and way to deal with allegations, as we've all heard exactly how often they get these things wrong. If there is an allegation of a crime it's up to the police to properly collect evidence and give it to the prosecutor's office, or the equivalent thereof in local terms.
And just like the Pr0n filters the government seems to be forcing on the public over in that section of the globe, it is completely unfeasible for a common carrier to even attempt this sort of thing. I would be completely pissed if I was blocked from accessing anything on the net. If a site is illegal then take it down, but don't try and filter what comes through my pipeline.
An attitude all to prevalent among non-techies, that throwing a few filters in place will magically fix things. Unfortunately I run into this all the time, and no amount of rational explanation makes their attitude change. Some times you have to implement the wrong solution while documenting what the right one should be, then go back and do it correctly for twice the cost.
Note: Cleaned up " ` ' in original quote to display correctly instead of in codes.
HEX
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If there is an allegation of a crime it's up to the police to properly collect evidence and give it to the prosecutor's office, or the equivalent thereof in local terms.
Except.. in Australia(i don't know about other countries), it's not usually a crime to commit copyright infringement. From http://www.copyright.org.au/information/introduction/intro-9.htm [copyright.org.au]
A person who infringes copyright can be sued by the copyright owner and taken to court. A court can order a range of things, including that the infringer pay compensation and pay the copyright owner's costs. In some cases, a person who infringes copyright can be charged by the police, and can be ordered to pay a fine or, in serious cases, jailed.
And from http://www.copyright.org.au/G052.pdf [copyright.org.au]
Criminal penalties
In some circumstances, infringement of copyright is a criminal offence to which fines and jail terms may apply. The criminal provisions generally apply to commercial piracy, and are used particularly in relation to infringements of copyright in records, videos and computer software.
Unless there is large scale commercial piracy going on the police just won't care, and until then it's a civil dispute that to go before the courts.
I know that a lot of people infringe on copyright (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Establishing legal precedent, backdoor edition? (Score:3, Insightful)
Simple way to fix this... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:As frightningly evil... (Score:4, Interesting)
Because other companies HAVE embraced the technology, and people are still pirating it away.
I mean, Netflix on Demand, Blockbuster via mail, Netflix via mail, etc.
It's not that it's so much harder, it's that the economy sucks, we have a bunch of wannabe rich people driving around in 80 thousand dollar cars that can't afford them, pinned the cost on the interest in their house, and now we have BIG problems dealing with that.
They DON'T HAVE the money to go out. The current generation thinks everything should be free (to them, at least). Their is no difference in bittorrent for legal and illegal use, etc., etc., etc.
People don't WANT to pay, and enough lames figured out how to use BitTorrent.
No distro groups are using bittorrent, they still use encrypted FTP. Bittorrent is for the lames without FTP leech accounts.. Read that last statement as "for the masses who have no technical skills or anything else to add to 'the scene'".
That's the problem with your statements... They are completely ignorant. Look at the current economy, and tell me we have a bunch of people in the USA that WANT to pay their own way.
--Toll_Free
Re:As frightningly evil... (Score:5, Interesting)
As frighteningly scary this copyright violation behavior we hear about all the time is, all those corporate scumbags who have for years been pushing for the privatization of culture and are step by step chipping at the rights of societies worldwide to enjoy the public domain (which is the fix for the economic damage the copyright monopoly inflicts in the short run) provided themselves the fertile ground for these violations by not adapting to new technologies, and ripping off the customers as hard as they could.
so, there you go.
Re:As frightningly evil... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
all you scumbags violating copyright to save a buck provided the excuse
Excuse? I don't think anything has been excused. I certainly won't pardon the listed companies for filing a lawsuit which _should_ be found frivolous.
If not, what's next? The phone company should listen in on your calls to make sure you're not singing copyrighted songs on the conference call?
The used car dealer should be held liable because black-hooded blokes use their cars as escape vehicles after robbing a bank or two?
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You might want to keep up with current events. Saving a buck is just one of the reasons to violate copyright. DRM is getting to the one of the big ones, maybe even the biggest one. For example, if you buy movies, you can't play them on the most recent MacBooks. When content providers use DRM, piracy is the only way to make stuff Just Work.
When the choice is between "I can watch the movie" and "I can't watch the movie" then the issue of which choice involves payme
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)