Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 3/25/2002 11:38:38 AM EDT
All, I may catch a little heat for this, but I think it's something we all need to think about - especially for the future of this nation. Twice, in two consecutive days, I have found a posting of someone/group of people looking to side-step the law. The law I'm referring to is "copyright infringement." I won't go into details, and start pointing fingers, but making unauthorized reproductions of ANY document, or a significant portion of the document, is a CRIME. We all (at one time or another) preach strict adherence to the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution. Do we then take everything else that document stands for and say to our selves, "well, I'm just getting it for me." If it's a movie that you're getting an illegal copy of, or if someone has converted a book to an electronic copy...you're still taking money away from the person/persons that made the product - and that's called theft. Deep down, I think the vast majority of us here are law-abiding citizens of this wonderful country. People who are responsible, and who stand up and do "the right thing." Why is it, then, when offers like this come along, that we can accept "bending the law here and there" as a way of placating our guilt? If we don't make a stand against that kind of stuff here, what does that tell our opponents? Or our children?
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 11:47:37 AM EDT
Examples please...
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 12:09:37 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 12:20:52 PM EDT
Well I for one am trying to save some money!! But I never works....... Here in Canada they are talking about adding a $500 tax on MP3 players!!!!! Can you say black market??
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 12:31:44 PM EDT
Andy the 2nd Amendment and copy right laws are NOT the same thing by a long shot! Most of us that use mp3's actually rip them from our own cd's which is legal and a part of "fair use". The ones we download tend to get us to buy the cd to fill in the gaps for the songs we don't have. Don't get on the high horse about "treating the record labels fairly". They are the most corrupt industry on the planet and have been ripping us and artists off for years. They'll be just fine and they are making TONS of cash. This is not an issue over legalities and "right and wrong" this is an issue over money, pure and simple.
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 12:32:27 PM EDT
Guys, I'm not talking about something so obfuscatory as MP3 files...but you're right, BeerSlayer - I do have a bug up my ass about something. I'm referring to those people out there who will copy a book, or sell an illegal video or DVD, and use this forum to further their means, even by providing a "buddy" a free copy of something, which effectively takes money away from those who created the product in the first place. Again, what does it tell our foes? Are we not the stalwart supporters of the Constitution? Do we stand up and do the right thing? Or do we do as our foes do..."talk the talk."
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 12:41:37 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 12:49:00 PM EDT
Soooooooooo, I am guessing that you [b]don't[/b] want a copy of Advanced server?? Yea, making CD copies of software is illegal and wrong...but I never claimed I was perfect. So throw stones in my direction if you want. However, I will state the obvious, some of the "free" software I received has led me to buy other items from the same company. Companies have a right to protect their stuff, but if they crack down too hard they often ending up hurting their own sales. Sgtar15
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 12:49:41 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 1:02:58 PM EDT
Damn, people - are you all missing the point? This site is a forum for those of us who like shooting, modifying, collecting, and other things that revolve around firearms, specifically AR-15's. This is not a personal attack on anyone, or anyone's posting. I personally don't give a damn whether you have a closet full of post-ban receivers with mounted pre-ban uppers, or rip the " do not remove" tags off of pillows and mattresses. If any one of you took it that way, sorry. This is about keeping the sanctity of this forum, as a whole, honest. This is about keeping this great website up and rolling with solid information and the camaraderie that goes along with the ownership of firearms; specifically in this case, the AR-15. In conclusion, if you like to swap .avi or mp3 files, fine...Morpheus works (or used to work, according to some of you). I'm sure there are at least 1,000 other sites that will allow you to obtain anything you'd like, regardless of its legal status. Don't contaminate this site with that stuff. It's the only site that I know of where thousands of AR-15 enthusiasts can come together and trade information about their favorite weapon.
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 1:05:57 PM EDT
Your new here aren't you??? We talk about alot more than just guns. sgtar15
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 1:13:43 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 1:30:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/25/2002 1:31:28 PM EDT by AndyTN]
Once again - at least two of you continue to miss the point. I suppose the General Information Area (Non-Firearms) can cover a lot of area. Sure, it's about anything that you want to talk about. Up with the 1st Amendment! Tell ya what - why don't you guys start a "Here's Where You Can Get Bootleg Stuff" folder under this part of ar15.com. This way, everyone can get together and discuss stuff that someone can be arrested for. I'm sure the people that finance this server would love that as well. Once again, I'm talking about keeping ALL the forums of AR15.com free of the kind of stuff that our adversaries in the anti-gun crowd would just LOVE to pick up on. And exploit. Imagine the headlines - "Large Pro-gun internet site with ties to the NRA cited for copyright infringement." I do know that this forum (and ALL forums of AR15.com) isn't the place for ILLEGAL activity.
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 1:52:13 PM EDT
54 posts and no email address??
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 2:35:17 PM EDT
AndyTN, I would suggest that you focus your attention and energies in other, more productive areas then losing sleep over a few questionable postings. This is a *firearms* board. With a government that is obsessed with guns (and especially Sport Utility Rifles that form the core of this board), the last thing that they would need is a trumped up excuse such as the few postings that you refer to take some sort of action against the Admins. Also, I don't know how long you were lurking here before registering or what other boards you frequent, but in my opinion AR15.COM has some of the best moderators going. They have a very good sense of when to intervene and when not to.
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 3:05:33 PM EDT
The software and entertainment industry has been raping the public for as long as they have been around. Over $600 for Photoshop??? $20 for a CD?? Thats what they cost when they first came out!!!!! Sorry to tell you, but the cost of "liberating" some of this stuff is already built into the cost. TH music industry has been whining about "theft" sincethe public has been able to record what they want. And they KEEP making money. THe same with most software. Do yo uthink the Adobe is gonna go broke from people getting bootleg copies of Photoshop? Don't think so. If They had put reasonable prices on the stuff, people would be less inclined to try to backdoor the industries. And remember that even if you just BORROWED a program for a single use, you have done the same thing that you are complaining about. [smoke]
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 3:34:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/25/2002 3:39:49 PM EDT by Sundrop]
Originally Posted By AndyTN: All, I may catch a little heat for this, but I think it's something we all need to think about - especially for the future of this nation. Twice, in two consecutive days, I have found a posting of someone/group of people looking to side-step the law. The law I'm referring to is "copyright infringement." I won't go into details, and start pointing fingers, [b]but making unauthorized reproductions of ANY document, or a significant portion of the document, is a [red]CRIME.[/red][/b]
View Quote
Well then...let me get my legal hat. To put it mildly, it ain't necessarily so. Copyright is mostly civil law and it's not likely anyone will be hauled into the pokey for some lockdown time. Of course I'm not an attorney. I will point you to an essay written about this matter and refer you to item 7). Item 8) does show some legal problems. [url]http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html[/url] Jim ©
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 3:47:46 PM EDT
Well, it seems that my initial post generated a little bit of interest. Hooray! I must admit - I find it amusing, albeit somewhat disappointing, that so many people felt I was criticizing their morality. I feel the only who came close to understanding the thread was Airwolf - and he chose to try to undermine my argument with by referring to me as someone who "lurks" around the boards, looking for wrongdoers. Well, hate to disappoint you, Airwolf...but you failed to get it as well. I wasn't referring to the United States government as "our adversaries." I think the Brady folks have that label all to themselves, and don't think for a minute that they wouldn't exploit anything or anyone to further their agenda. As I stated previously, I don't have any fixation on morality. It doesn't matter to me if you do or don't do things on the sly. All I'm saying is that there's no place on AR15.com for it. Especially for penalties that involve federal statutes. While I agree that it's a moderator's job to look over the postings, perhaps the moderator for this portion of the site doesn't understand the legalities, didn't notice the postings, or just doesn't care (hopefully not) about whether federal laws are being violated. I put the thread up to get an idea on where most of you that replied stand on the issue. Obviously, I got my answer. I'll pick something a little more diverse for my next string.
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 4:07:05 PM EDT
Andy, I 'think' I know what you're getting at here - purity of purpose and an absolutely clean board so far as any possible legal encroachments. If the above is correct I doubt there are many who would technically disagree. However, copyright law, patent infringements (all intellectual property protections) are all open to various legal interpretations. For example I don't know if someone posts a link to a newspaper or television story if that's entirely legal or if there's infringement ? Purity in most any endeavor attempted by man is difficult to achieve.
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 4:14:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/25/2002 4:14:57 PM EDT by The_Beer_Slayer]
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 4:20:02 PM EDT
5subslr5, Yeah, you get it. Here's the questionable thread, in a nutshell: Member makes an electronic copy of a copyrighted document (in this case, a book from a well-known author, which included photos). Member then offers the file - for free - to anyone that wants it. Regardless of price, or lack thereof, it's illegal to do this. The link that Sundrop posted has a very good FAQ guide which seems to go hand in hand to what I was saying here. Suppose that I should've said all this in the beginning. My mistake. Most of these guys thought I was some anti-Napster protestor or something.
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 4:25:52 PM EDT
For example I don't know if someone posts a link to a newspaper or television story if that's entirely legal or if there's infringement ?
View Quote
Posting a link shouldn't be a problem. In fact, since most news sites are supported by advertising and advertisers want to see lots of hits, the publishers of the copyrighted material are probably happy to have links to their stuff all over the internet. When someone cuts and pastes an entire article, [b]that[/b] seems a little questionable. I prefer to just post a little "teaser" excerpt and give a link to the rest.
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 4:30:41 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Renamed: When someone cuts and pastes an entire article, [b]that[/b] seems a little questionable. I prefer to just post a little "teaser" excerpt and give a link to the rest.
View Quote
Renamed, your post better states what I was attempting to say.
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 4:33:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By AndyTN: Member makes an electronic copy of a copyrighted document (in this case, a book from a well-known author, which included photos). Member then offers the file - for free - to anyone that wants it.
View Quote
In my mind that is copyright infringement.
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 5:00:22 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 5:16:45 PM EDT
Originally Posted By AndyTN: Member makes an electronic copy of a copyrighted document (in this case, a book from a well-known author, which included photos). Member then offers the file - for free - to anyone that wants it. Regardless of price, or lack thereof, it's illegal to do this.
No, it's not. It's called "fair use", although I admit I'm stretching the definition here. I could legally make a few copies of a CD for personal or family use, or have my neighbor watch a DVD I bought. However: I could loan a book to somebody, and expect it back, and I could do it repeatedly, as often as I please. It's just cheaper to send it per e-mail than shipping the actual book back and forth. If they like the book, they'll buy their own copy of it, because it's a pain to read something like a book on a computer screen; if not, they won't waste their money. Call it "try before you buy". Besides, the pictures look way better in the printed version. At any rate, I quit loaning books or CDs, 'cause I rarely get them back, but I still want friends and buddies to read _that_ book or watch _this_ movie, or try out that piece of software. Btw: I asked to author of one my of favorite books for permission to e-mail the scan of his work around, and he gave me the go-ahead, it's free advertisement, thanks for the effort. People will buy the book if it's any good. It's different with software or music: I still buy as many music CDs as before, about 4 a year, only now I can save my money for the good stuff, which is rare enough, and don't have to buy a whole CD for one semi-good song, or a single, which isn't much cheaper than an album. Too much crap out there, too much assembly line/test tube/plastic garbage. Software: see music ;) I don't buy less software than I did before highspeed Internet and cheap CD burners, but now I can tryout more programs before I recommend or buy them, I can figure out at home how they work or handle, and if they are any good, before I purchase them for the business, AND I can give free tech support. Sidenote: If it wasn't for the pirated copy of some database program or other I found 15 yrs or so ago, I wouldn't be in the business I am in now, which would mean my kids, if I'll ever have any, would be starving ;) Will you please think of the CHILDREN!?! [:D]
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 5:22:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By AndyTN: Are we not the stalwart supporters of the Constitution? Do we stand up and do the right thing? Or do we do as our foes do..."talk the talk."
View Quote
Ain't nothing 'bout copyright in the Constitution. :P In fact, that's how books used to get distributed: somebody made a copy. Copyright law is a fairly new phenomenon.
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 7:27:14 PM EDT
Andy...I do not support your constitution... If you want come up here to the North Counrty and try to arrest my ass!!! BTW I have a nice pigeon hole for you..........
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 8:01:10 PM EDT
I get what you are trying to say....you think this site should be 100% legit on [b]every and all[/b] issues. That way the ATF will have less reason to come after us....right? Well, I got news for you, they are coming after us no matter what the hell we do. I could care less about what the ATF's or the Brady's plans are anymore. I know that I am their target already, so F them. AndyTN, pick your targets well. This copy-right crap is the least of a gun owners worries. Focus on the real issues. Sgtar15
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 8:08:52 PM EDT
[:k]
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 8:20:19 PM EDT
Although I do not condone pirating and profiting from pirated materials, I do however believe in freedom of information. If it is out there, and it is [i]easily accessible[/i], so be it.
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 8:27:57 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Kar98: Ain't nothing 'bout copyright in the Constitution. :P In fact, that's how books used to get distributed: somebody made a copy. Copyright law is a fairly new phenomenon.
View Quote
Incorrect, sir! Article I, section 8 states, in part:
The Congress shall have power...To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
View Quote
On the other hand, the modern version of copyright has absolutely NOTHING to do with "promoting the progress of science and the useful arts" and is instead concerned only with perpetuating the ownership of intellectual property. Current copyright term for a corporation is NINETY-FIVE YEARS. One could reasonably argue that this is directly counter to the intention of the framers (and indeed, is counterproductive--if you create something and can milk it for more than the lifespan of the average human being, you have no impetus to create more!) Up until the 20th century, copyright was less than 20 years. It's risen steadily since (half a dozen times in the last fifty years, IIRC. The last one coincided with the end of Walt Disney's copyright on Mickey Mouse.)
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 8:34:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/25/2002 8:39:57 PM EDT by CLP]
Andy, you're basically correct. But don't bother wasting your time arguing with those addicted to copying what they should rightfully be paying for. You'll only give yourself an ulcer. And they [i]won't[/i] get it. You can make the best series of economic/moral arguments humanly possible, and still receive what amounts, inescapably, to socialist moralizing in return. I work in those industries that are heavily impacted by piracy. When piracy occurs, [i]I[/i] get hurt. Thanks for being one of the honest guys, and prodding others to follow.
Link Posted: 3/25/2002 8:52:38 PM EDT
Kar98, Did you ask Stephen Ambrose for his permission? If not, I think you need to check out the link that was sent by a gentleman earlier in the thread. It's a nice FAQ list that, if taken by you with the same arguments you used, would make you guilty. Hate to break this to you, but every single time you send an email, you send an illegal copy (that you'll never get back) to someone. If you do it more than 10 times, I think the site says that makes you a felon. If I'm wrong, my apologies. But I don't think I am this time...
Top Top