The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Need an opinion. Temp-banned JTV Streamer/DMCA/Rights
KoopahTroopah
The koopas, the troopas.Philadelphia, PARegistered User regular
The koopas, the troopas.Philadelphia, PARegistered User regular
Nevermind.
KoopahTroopah on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
What I see in those emails is basically Jacob doing everything possible to get you to just shut up, accept your very brief ban, and avoid drawing attention to the fact that you were violating copyright, and you jumping up and down shouting "HAY I'M TOTALLY IGNORANT OF THE LAW, WHY IS IT WRONG THAT I AM SHOWING COPYRIGHTED CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION?" You literally forced him to take further action against you, because once you made it obvious that you didn't have the legal right to rebroadcast the movie, he was legally obligated to shut you down.
From what Jacob says, justin.tv basically has a "don't ask, don't tell" policy when it comes to copyrighted material: they assume that everything people broadcast is done in accordance with all relevant intellectual property laws, unless they hear otherwise from either the broadcaster or the actual owner of the content. So, other people get away with it by keeping their yaps shut, and not protesting when their copyrighted material gets flagged for something else. You, however, were a silly goose about it, so you got your hand slapped. Learn a lesson, and move on.
Also, you should probably familiarize yourself with the legality of streaming media if you plan on continuing to make a habit of it.
Your over-exaggeration of the situation is pretty ridiculous. I was more concerned with the fact that I got banned for streaming a movie that I bought legally for no gain at all but just to be a nice guy. I didn't realize that it was illegal if I purchased the movie, it's not like I illegally downloaded the movie, streamed it for money, and gained a profit. I was streaming it because I was going to watch it anyway and decided, "hey I might as well stream it, other people do to, so fuck it." There's no difference between inviting 10 people over to my house for a movie night.
Also I'm not sure how I made it obvious or how I was a silly goose about it, I thought I was banned for DMCA AAAAAAAAND the nudity violation when I first got banned, and then they were all "Guess what banned again"
Really? As bad as Japan? Get the fuck out of here sir. 40-50 people watching a movie over the internet is not as bad as hundreds of thousands people dying and going missing in a natural disaster. If you think otherwise, you're a power hungry joke of a human being.
Also yes the latest reply straightened things out for the most part.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
I figure this thread is done and you probably know what's up but just in case (and I know this is patronizing assholery to some extent), realize that the law and what you think is ethical aren't the same thing. Also recognize that people telling you what the law is aren't necessarily telling you what they think the law should be.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
What are we supposed to debate over?
As you learned, there is a significant difference in the eyes of the law.
The vast, vast majority of piracy is initiated by people who are trying to "just be a nice guy." Warez/cracking collectives who upload zero-day torrents to Ye Olde Bay o' Piracy don't gain anything tangible from their actions: they do it for reputation, for the lulz, or for the simple desire to share something neat with the world.
The trouble with both their and your actions, though, is that the thing being shared doesn't belong to you. You didn't create it, you didn't film it, and even if you obtained your personal copy of the DVD legally, your legal use of that film does not include public performance of it. In fact, your argument about "it's the same as having friends over" is explicitly addressed in copyright law:
You have the right to show the film to a group of friends. You do not, however, have the right to show that retail copy of the film to, say, a church youth group (not that you would anyway in that case, what with the sparklepenis and the deification issues), or to a high school assembly (regardless of whether or not you charged admission). You also do not have the right to transmit a performance of the work - ie, to stream the video on the internet.
Also: holy shit, yeah, I totally did not even think you were trying to seriously ask if your copyright violation was as bad as a 9.0 earthquake followed by a tsunami that killed almost ten thousand people. That entire concept is so retarded that the most remote notion of considering it hadn't even begun to contemplate the possibility of crossing my mind. I assumed you were making some awkward reference to an especially draconian section of Japanese copyright law or something. That's pretty fucked up, dude.
Not most of them, all of them do.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
It's the standard FBI and/or Interpol warning along with notices of the potential fines and/or prison terms for violating it. Plus a lot of DVD's have a "don't pirate" ad in the trailers section. Some movies up in theatres do as well, which makes absolutely no sense since you just paid to sit in a theatre and watch it get played from not a DVD.
Don't get me wrong, our copyright laws are pretty fucked up and its rather difficult to not run afoul of them depending on how a judge feels about fair use at any given moment. That said, this was not one of those rather tricksy and questionable issues about re-purposing or reinterpreting someone's work or even for something relatively ancient that has only been kept out of the public domain ex post facto by Congress. You blatantly violated someone else's intellectual property rights. Don't do that.
Pretty sure Zack Snyder has received all of the monetary income he was going to gain from this movie. Even if I have something that says, hey I don't own these, these guys own this, go support them. Like I even tell people in chat to buy the fucking movie while watching it. Maybe this is why I'm upset, I feel like I got banned for supporting a movie and everyone here is like "Trololol do not pass go", but once again whatever just let it go, sorry. "Oh hey Japan."
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
Nope. And you weren't supporting the movie or its director. I still don't get why you feel that you were. So...yeah. Maybe try debating and/or discoursing your position rather than just expect people to accept it as valid. Hell, maybe just try saying what your position actually is. So far all I can figure out is that you want to be able to broadcast other people's movies for free. Which is fine, but only if you restrict it to stuff made before 1923 or put into the public domain.
Legally the options for watching a movie are purchasing it, purchasing a license to view it through something like Netflix, or watching it when someone else does this (like when you watch a movie on TV). The people that made the movie get money in return for this.
How are you supporting a movie if you're giving it away for free?
Yeah we get up in arms about this because it's outrageously silly.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
yeah I was just trying to be generous/not wanting someone to jump my throat from the other direction by saying pirated DVDs may not.
It is not your right as a consumer to determine how an artist's work is distributed
Cause it's a good movie? You've never seen a movie/pieces of a movie on the television and then go buy it because you thought it was decent?
I'd say this is the first valid point I've seen, but then again if I was a big huge movie director who made visions of graphic novels into movies, I'd be happy with the fact that people are watching it and liking it. I wouldn't care if I was skimped out on what could be 100 dollars. I guess I'm the only non-greedy person on the planet, it's only money guys.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
If I was a dick, I'd point out all the same shit that you guys have been saying. You didn't buy your friends copy but on the back it says private use only and all that crap. I'm saying this stuff happens, it's not that big of a deal, everyone is making it seem like I commited murder(I.e. the japan disaster comparison). I understand why I got banned, I just don't think it's just. In my opinion. Which many people have said 10x over it's the law that counts not your opinion. Okay, whatever, case closed.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
Think about it, the copyright owner can get jtv in trouble if they don't a policy in place that clamps down on what the DMCA calls repeat offenders. JTV is just covering their ass here.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
Wanting to be compensated for your work is not the same thing as greed. Additionally let's say it is only 100 dollars that is being shorted. Now lets say you are one of thousands of people doing this. Purchasing the movie may be the right thing to do to show support, but people will more often than not take advantage of the fact that they can view it for free and not show their support.
If it is legal to buy a movie and then just stream that one copy to whoever wants to see it in any form then you are talking about seriously cutting in to the revenue that is generated.
It is no small expense that movie theaters have to pay in order to show a film at their theater, you are essentially advocating a way to circumvent the entire way that movie industry operates because "It's only money guys"
I think generally that is why there are laws in place to regulate that sort of thing, and why the industry as a whole frowns upon anything that violates those laws.
Official PA Forums FFXIV:ARR Free Company <GHOST> gitl.enjin.com Join us on Sargatanas!
And I get that, I even said that earlier. I'll just file this under I'm an idiot and just let it go.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
In fact, that you were breaking U.S. and international copyright law is the first valid point you saw here, but it seems you ignored it.
Believe it or not it isn't even the director who gets to decide these issues, it's the people who own the movie.
Portraying people who want to be paid for their work as being greedy is a whole lot of goosery.
Basically it seems like you came here to try and get a group of people to say, essentially, 'fuck yeah pirate that movie', and now you seem kind of upset when we point out that what you did is actually quite illegal.
Netflix paid licensing fees and borrowing a friend's copy falls under fair use. So even if you were a dick you'd just continue to be wrong about things. And no, I'm making it seem like you violated intellectual property and copyright. Which you did.
Again, why? Try actually making a point instead of just repeating it.
The major issue is that copyright law has been continually pushed out to being near perpetuity which has a massively negative effect on future creative works. To say that it (and our patent system) is in need of reform is to suggest that it gets a bit chilly in Antarctica. The breadth of coverage isn't so much an issue, history shows the foolishness of requiring actual registration, if it weren't for the drastic length of time that it covers and the strictures that it places on anyone else reinterpreting or being inspired by your works.
The thing is, all those actual arguments over the need of reform can get pushed aside because of the whole "olol piracy should be legal" idiocy.
Some very smart people have made this argument. See http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/against.htm for instance.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
How is letting Mickey Mouse falling into public domain helpful to future collective work?
I mention Mickey Mouse because his expiration of copyright is what drives Disney to continue to push for the laws to change.
Yeah, I've seen that and agree with the point that IP is restrictive which is why I'd like to see it curtailed from the current extremes. However their view of eliminating it entirely, and that it would have no ill effect on individuals or the public writ large just isn't very convincing to me. Particularly given their examples. I'm much more in agreement with Lawrence Lessig's stance. Regulation, but good regulation.
That isn't actually true. Mickey Mouse is trademarked and so falls under a different legal purview and isn't really impacted by the Sonny Bono extension.
In terms of how expanding the public domain helps future collective works. West Side Story, for instance, would have arguably been illegal or required to pay fees to the estate of Shakespeare if his works weren't in the public domain. Instead it has been able to reap its own windfall and enrich actors, theatres, &c. for having existed. Pride and Prejudice and Zombies similarly violate modern copyright if the base work hadn't been made prior to 1923. Dali painting the Mona Lisa with a mustache. &c. The ability to reinterpret, repurpose, or just remake works in a new way is hampered by overly restrictive copyright laws and that means that the marketplace is artificially hampered and more barren than it otherwise would be. And without any countervailing benefit.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
I agree with you and Lessig. I'm just pointing out that there are non lolers who have thought about this and believe in very limited IP rights.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
No, it isn't.
Well okay then.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
You're giving off some seriously mixed messages here, Koopah. You're completely in the legal wrong about this issue, that has been amply proven on several occasions, complete with linked references to actual copyright law, and now you keep alternating between "ok fine i was wrong just drop it you guys why are you all picking on me," and "alright look but wasn't what i did actually right because of [irrelevant moral argument or unrelated comparison]?" If you really want to drop it, the way to do that would be to not post in the thread anymore, not to keep arguing the issue.
There is no balm to your self-esteem available here: you were wrong, you are continuing to be wrong, you are showing no indications whatsoever that you actually accept your wrongness on this. You seem to be waiting for someone to come along and say "hey man, you know, I think you have a totally valid argument for why you should be able to violate copyright law, good job KoopahTroopah!" But nobody is going to do that, and all you're accomplishing is providing a very silly goose for us to prod with the Stick of Reason.