[QUOTE] [b]John S Stuart wrote:[/b]
[b]It is still illegal for him to do so[/b] (upload and broadcast that is), and as such, sooner or later will face the wrath of the RIAA. (And that is just the American arm of copyright law).
[/QUOTE]
The RIAA isn't an "American arm of copyright law." It only represents American recording companies and copyright law lobbying and enforcement is just one of its many activities. The MPAA (movies) and BSA (computer software) are some other lobby groups (and there are more) that have just as much stake in protecting copyright as the RIAA.
[QUOTE] [b]John S Stuart wrote:[/b]
Please read the following story (I hope you are reading this too David): "Woman to Pay RIAA $220,000 For 24 Downloaded Songs"
That case is from 2006. As of 2008, the RIAA don't sue individual file sharers for copyright infringement anymore:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122966038836021137.html
Also, in that case you cited, the RIAA was willing to settle early on for "only" $5000. It's only because she refused to settle and forced a jury trial that her judgment ended up being so high.
BTW, I'm not defending (or condemning) Dave Fuller. I just have an interest in the clash between big media and media fans and copyright law and follow the news in those areas.
GratefulFan · Member since
Of all the pressures to shut down conversation on this topic, claiming your depression makes you too delicate to have your actions challenged on the internet seriously has to take the grand prize. Well done Richard. While I'll acknowledge that my second round of Urkel and the reference to prissy emailing was arguably a little gratuitous, the initial complaint that prompted the first outburst was not. Let's be clear. Nobody here is stealing your lunch money or shoving you into a locker because they don't like your face. You're not being bullied. The complaints are valid and relate to your rather consistently atrocious actions. From demonstrably false accusations against Fuller, to black holing posts that retroactively make you look bad and reveal your bias, to making a bunch of marginal statements about Fuller's status in the community like they're as reliable as sunrise, and finally to the spite motivated tattling, well, it's all a bit of a mess. That's the problem. And if you don't want to do the time, don't do the crime.
My 'Happy Easter' was a genuine attempt to separate the complaint about the behaviour from the value of the person. Not the clearest message when it's packaged with a 'rat' assertion I understand, but that was the intent. I have a great deal of sensitivity about hurting real people behind these computer screens and I've talked about it many times over the years here. I'm dealing with something I feel similarly about in another section of QZ so I can assure you I'm not disconnected from the principles. The difference is I don't expect to be immune from fair criticism of my words or my actions. While your feelings and your struggles with depression absolutely matter it's not reasonable to demand that your words and actions should be limited by nothing and mine limited by your state of mental health.
Finally, it's always a mistake to make assumptions about what direct or indirect experience anybody else has with depression or any other serious life challenge. I was shocked to see you minimize another poster's struggles with bipolar disorder, particularly given that it is a disorder of both deep depression and sometimes frightening mania. To be frank, taken together, your seeming expectation of immunity and your callousness towards a fellow poster also managing mental health challenges suggests a degree of disconnected self focus that is more than a little off putting.
GratefulFan · Member since
@Adam Methos. Great posts on the RIAA angle, and essentially the ones I would have made had you not covered the issues so well.
GratefulFan · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]inu-liger wrote:[/b]
Anyways, get back on topic and keep them attacks on the collectors coming, since that's all you seem to be capable of doing here.[/QUOTE]
On topic: What is the collective justification for the dogged pursuit and obsessive reputation smearing of a man who just wants to do what he wants with a track he traded for? Why would anyone think they have some kind of right or privilege of control of Fuller's intentions or philosophy?
John S Stuart · Member since
AdamMethos: [b] Good call.[/b] I am not a resident of the United States and I am not familiar with the rules and regulations of the RIAA. I am also unfamiliar with the rules and regulations of the copyright laws of the Austrialian and Asiatic regions.
However; I can assure you that the same cannot be said about the BPI (British Phonograph Industry) or that of the other European nations.
As Fuller's Youtube channel is universal; he still has to abide by the international laws of those nations; which means that he can still be done for those breaches of copyright over here - and I also assure you that the BPI [b][i]will[/i][/b] go after individuals.
That is why Amazon, iTunes etc, etc, have different regionalised codes. So an iTune track that maybe legal for you to buy in the USA, may not be available in the UK (and vice-versa); So why Fuller may feel that he is safely out of the woods in one area, he is certainly not in all; and does not invalidate my above arguments.
Everyone willing to dance with the devil; has to pay the consequences sometime.
11 Jan 2013 United Kingdom (Stick until the about the serious consequences)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNUAHPIHvio
5 March 2013 Japan www.worldipreview.com/news/japan-cracks-down-on-piracy
As mentioned in the statement above, Japan’s newly enacted laws could land illegal downloaders with two years in jail, while uploaders could face a whopping ten years and ¥10m (£69,000) fine.
John S Stuart · Member since
John S Stuart · Member since
The Bill, if passed in its present form, will not introduce any new offences. Instead, it amends the consequences of committing the existing offences. It will raise the maximum penalty for wilful making for sale or dealing in infringing copies of copyright material like software, films and music to up to 10 years in prison (from a current maximum of two years) and/or an unlimited fine.
Ten years in prison and/or unlimited fine. I wonder how many copies it would take to reproduce to make that sort of gamble tempting?
inu-liger · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]John S Stuart wrote:[/b]5 March 2013 Japan
www.worldipreview.com/news/japan-cracks-down-on-piracy
As mentioned in the statement above, Japan’s newly enacted laws could land illegal downloaders with two years in jail, while uploaders could face a whopping ten years and ¥10m (£69,000) fine.[/QUOTE]
Yeah no word of a lie there! That one has been making the rounds significantly, and a fair number of people in the animé community are really nervous about this, since they're concerned that even if they're sharing their own creations (ie. doujinshi), that it will still get them in trouble with the Japanese police nonetheless given how overzealous the police force there behaves.
This is the same police force that until recently were boasting of their belief that internet IP addresses automatically proved guilt of anyone accused of online digital crimes!
tero! 48531 · Member since
"Dear Brian
We are a group of huge fans of yours, and for years we have been collecting and trading all the unreleased material that has anything to do with Queen. We have hours and hours worth of Queen material you wouldn't even remember recording, let alone all the material you do remember.
We have traded with hundreds of peope around the world, and recently a few of us, a group called Fanthology, came up with the idea of releasing all this material (except of course a few choice items as an exclusive reward for our inner circle) for anyone to publicly download. We had estimated that within a few years, well before any Queen anthology, we would be able to have it all publicly available.
You can imagine our moral outrage when we discovered that somebody in our group had broken their word and humiliated us by already making available something the proper owner (ie. the Fanthology) had not authorised. What's even worse is that now he's selling the same material, and possibly hindering your future business of releasing any official anthology material.
Please advise us how to best stop this unfair and immoral activity. Yours Sincerely
Fanthology"
GratefulFan · Member since
This is Interesting stuff. So entirely theoretically, if David were to run afoul of Japanese authorities and get 10 years in prison, and if the RIAA declined to prosecute him as an individual for the same acts but elected to send a donkey across the Pacific to bugger him at 9:00 am sharp each day, what is the collective justification for the dogged pursuit and obsessive reputation smearing of a man who just wants to do what he wants with a track he traded for? Why would anyone think they have some kind of right or privilege of control of Fuller's intentions or philosophy?
Stick · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]GratefulFan wrote:[/b]
Why would anyone think they have some kind of right or privilege of control of Fuller's intentions or philosophy?
[/QUOTE]
Good old greed.
john bodega · Member since
Can't you guys just band together to get his channel removed?
I'm sick of hearing about this shit. Do something about it, or shut the fuck up.
. · Member since
9am is well early to get buggered by a donkey.
mooghead · Member since
Yeah, stop discussing this on an internet message board. And stop forcing me to read it every day you twats.
inu-liger · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Zebonka12 wrote:[/b]
Can't you guys just band together to get his channel removed?
I'm sick of hearing about this shit. Do something about it, or shut the fuck up.[/QUOTE]
