Asguard, you are WRONG. The dissenting opinion is the opinion that did not prevail. The legal RULING from the case is based only on the MAJORITY opinion. The minority opinion allows those who did not prevail to state why they were against the Majority opinion, but it's NOT the law.
When are all these entertainment industry moguls gonna pony up their cash to Einstein's estate for profiting off the lasers he helped invent? Great world we live in. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Einstein's estate brings in ~$18 million a year. The money goes to Jerusalem's Hebrew University, the beneficiary of his estate.
we occupied we won scurry back under the rock you crawled out of, adoucette your mpaa/riaa goons are waiting with their rubber hoses
correct. regardless of how you feel about the matter, making copies of movies and giving those copies away is illegal.
copyright laws vary widely from country to country. what might be under copyright here in the US might not be somewhere else. what is still under copyright in other countries may have expired long ago here in the US. what is needed in my opinion instead of SOPA is a unified copyright law. it isn't just copyright we are talking about here. i personally firmly believe in intellectual freedom. stryder hit it on the head "CAP IT ALL" ism. that was sweet stryder.
I think it can be viable for a full band, albeit more of a challenge. I was in a band with 6 to 8 members some years back--with that many people it's difficult no matter what you do. And we also had to haul a trailer, because we had a double bass and cello. Otherwise, I've worked in trios, duos, or solo, and we always mixed house shows with venue shows. After a while one figures out which cities tend to be better for house shows, and of course, the more "established" places are best. I've only worked with booking agents/agencies a few times, and mostly for Europe, but nowadays they are even booking a lot of house shows. I've done a few U.S. tours with foreign acts, and it's always kind of funny watching the reactions of those artists who have never toured the U.S. prior to everything from the "venue" to the pay to the sometimes egregious lack of hospitality. My understanding is that with most such scenarios involving mechanical royalties, the artist is actually getting nothing--see Gustav's post a couple of pages back. I see this present day controversy over piracy, SOPA, etc. as somewhat more akin to that of previous days with bootlegging/ROiOs for a number of reasons. Part of it is that SOPA and other such attempts at combating piracy really complicate notions of "intellectual property" and what is and is not protected by copyright; for instance, one can be guilty of or complicit in copyright infringement by having a fragment of copyrighted material somewhere in the "background," like a video in which there is a wee little television screen somewhere in the backdrop showing a Hollywood film or tv show. Also, the bootleg "industry" was always more one of trading than of selling; nevertheless, there was (is) often enough selling involved. But prior to the advent of cheap cassettes, the only means of making live recordings available was through pressing vinyl--and that wasn't and still isn't terribly cheap. Moreover, a number of the bootleg labels were using virgin vinyl, costing even more. I have a handful of books on the bootleg industry, and even from these it's not entirely clear whether or not anyone was actually making any profit (back in the 70's and early 80's, that is; it changed dramatically with cds). Trading that stuff is not problematic for me, but the idea of selling it is. Still, I have a fair bit of bootleg vinyl (but a lot more traded material)--I mean, a fair bit of live Pink Floyd 67-71 or King Crimson 69-74 is material that is either not available anywhere else (improv, songs like "Embryo," etc.) and also not copyrighted, and if I couldn't get it by trade... Few artists would complain about bootlegging--whose gonna buy an overpriced, mediocre sounding bootleg who hasn't already purchased all of the proper releases? Likewise, bootlegging was enormously influential in establishing acts like Patti Smyth, Televison, Pere Ubu, etc. who had very few proper releases available. Again, it was something that the industry was mostly in a stir about.
promoting software that circumvents copy protection is prohibited under dmca. please do not encourage theft if you want a backup copy, purchase it thanks Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Jack Valenti, president of the MPAA, wrote in a Los Angeles Times editorial, "The intent of these Web sites is clear. Break the encryption. Steal the product. The posting of the hacking code is akin to mass producing and distributing keys to a department store. The keys have only one real purpose: to allow a thief to open a locked door to steal the goods he targets." think of all those hardworking people that you are throwing out on the street by encouraging the use of software that defeats copyright protection. think of the innocent little children that rely on their actor/musician moms and dads for their next meal and...... college tuition
Yeah, helping this guy to live in a mansion in NZ off of other people's work is a real win Gustav http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/01/21/megauploads-kim-dotcom-barricaded-himself-in-mansion-police/
Not only do I detest the practices of major labels, I also can't stand any of the shit they put out. I've been collecting music since I was 14 and have a fairly sizable collection, and yet I'm not sure if I have even a single release that was put out by a major label since perhaps 1984 or '85. And I would venture that at least half of my music is comprised of stuff that was put out after that time. I've done some self-releases, but I mostly prefer to work with small labels. Perhaps most importantly, they pay for the release. But also, if they're fairly established, they've got the angle on distribution and manage to get my stuff into places that I would not be able--not only all over Europe and Asia, but Australia and New Zealand as well. As for recording, with ensembles I prefer mostly to record in a studio with a proper engineer, but for solo stuff I'm satisfied with my own "skills" and primitive technologies.
Actually if you read the rulings, you can make a back-up copy of your own DVD for personal use. What DMCA prevented is companies from selling software to break the encryption. Turns out that you can get it for free. http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-dvd-ripper.htm And, if all you use the software for is making legal backup copies you aren't breaking any laws, nor are you doing anything unethical.
again, circumventing copy protection for any purpose is an act of theft why do you persist in advocating anti social acts?
The most attractive feature is its ability to rip encrypted DVDs without packing with third-party DVD decrypter. I tested WinX DVD Ripper by ripping “X-Men: First Class” to MP4, a recently released DVD, and it worked without any problem. The ripping speed is also impressing. I wonder how it performs with your DVDs. A reminder: as stated by the developer, this freeware can remove region code, CSS protection and Sony ARccOS, however, it doesn't support DVDs encrypted by Disney X-project DRM. Therefore if you have such DVDs, you need to upgrade to a Platinum edition. this is really sad the motion picture industry in a bid to protect proprietary content is been undermined by the pirate, adoucette by his incessant linkage to questionable software. just because it is free does not mean the makers of this software are not profiting from it
Because I'm not advocating anti-social acts Gustav. http://dvd-copy-software-review.toptenreviews.com/is-it-legal-to-copy-protected-dvds-.html
i'm not sure if i would concur with making a backup is theft. i have made about 3 or 4 backups of my legally purchased DOOM95 game. i do not feel like i have stolen anything. edit: another interesting point is the region code. i remember when the monkey was still here he started a thread that requested a way to circumvent the region code. when he was in the US he purchased some DVDs that he was taking back to finland with him and therefor would be unplayable. i personally felt he had every right to circumvent the code in this situation. due to sciforums policy he had to get the info through PM, apparently **. ********* gave it to him. i stand behind the monkey AND **. ********* in this regard.
I need to do a little more research on this. I know my friend had to contact Harrissongs for mechanical licensing for the song Savoy Truffle, as HFA did not handle Harrison's stuff. I agree on this point. While in a somewhat gray area legally, those who collect RoIOs have usually bought everything the artist has officially released - sometimes more than once. And if some of these were officially available, we would probably buy it too. Some artists might complain. Robert Fripp comes to mind. Then again, he has made many bootlegs of King Crimson available for purchase on his DGM site.
yes you are the only reason why the dmca distorted the doctrine of fair use is because of rabid piracy advocates like you. it is a commercial product and the only right you have are to the instance of the actual purchase movies are a product like any other and a warped sense of entitlement to an infinite number of copies can only be the product of a deranged and greedy mind do we expect a light bulb to last forever? in the year 2200, with replication tech fully developed and functional, do we demand the manufacturer to allow us to replicate the light bulb...... just in case? fair use is determined by the owners of content, not the consumer. goddamn communist!!
yeah just one in a series of takedowns and convictions sans sopa and pipa, mind you Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Nope. Unlike your rants, I actually produce external support for my position. And Fair Use is determined by the courts. http://w2.eff.org/IP/eff_fair_use_faq.php
