Aussie Students Face Jail Over Music Sharing Site 448
An anonymous reader writes "SMH this morning is reporting that three uni students may be jailed for their creation of a music sharing web site. Ok, piracy is not a good thing, but jail is just a tad extreme, don't you think? I hope ARIA (Australian version of RIAA) are pleased with themselves. What burns me about this article is the quote: 'Counsel for the Commonwealth, Paul Roberts, SC, said Ng was well aware he was acting illegally. Not only was the site camouflaged - the web space had been let to him by a teenage boy in Perth - but Ng had co-written an essay for his information technology law course on "open source software licensing."'
Not entirely sure what OS licensing has to do with music piracy."
nice non-sequitur (Score:5, Funny)
Book 'em, Danno.
FFS...we're getting our asses kicked here.
Re:nice non-sequitur (Score:5, Insightful)
Punishment fitting the crime (Score:3, Insightful)
Using the 99 US cents that Apple's iTunes service charges for songs, the 1000 songs on the computer had a commercial value of around $990. If the students had stolen a car worth $990 woul
Hmmm.... (Score:5, Informative)
On a final note, I don't think anything really needs to be said about how his paper on "open source software licensing" is somehow evidence of culpability. A hefty roll of the eyes goes out to the genius who thought that up.
because open source guys are smart (Score:5, Informative)
your slightly wrong (Score:4, Informative)
Section 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A [setting forth copyright owners' exclusive rights and visual artists' artistic rights], the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:
1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
This is what I use for my legal disclaimer and you could check out some of the spoofs I've done in the past on CNN, ABCNews, Republicans, etc. (antioffline.com), as well as daily copying copyrighted news. It's public domain. Which from what you state, I gather you're implying that if you photocopy a newspaper you could be sued... You could if you sold it as your own for profit, but not by using it. BTW, my legal mumbo jumbo was written for me by someone in the law field considering the shit I had/have to deal with.
Am I breaking the law copying news?, if you think so, then you are too since you copy it to your machine without permission when it gets cached.
Re:your slightly wrong (Score:5, Funny)
BTW, my legal mumbo jumbo was written for me by someone in the law field considering the shit I had/have to deal with.
Which is just as well, considering the apparent confusion that has led you to cite US copyright law in relation to an Australian criminal proceeding.
US vs. AU law on fair use (Score:4, Informative)
17 USC 107
Australian fair use is much more narrow than American fair use. Australian copyright law does not grant a broad exception for private copying of audio or time-shifting of television programs the way USA copyright law does (section 1008 for private copying of audio; Sony v. Universal for time-shifting of TV). While the "such as" in the first sentence of 17 USC 107 is interpreted to be illustrative and not limitative, Australian fair use's corresponding language is limitative [law.gov.au].
Re:US vs. AU law on fair use (Score:2)
I am familiar with Australian (C) law, but not all of its intricacies.
I also feel it is worth pointing out that IP rights are violated millions of times a day without anyone batting an eyelid. Part of the balance between the rights of the owners of copyright material and the public good comes from the utter unenforceability of much of copyri
Re:US vs. AU law on fair use (Score:5, Informative)
Are you suggesting then that it is illegal to, for example, record a CD that you have purchased onto a Minidisc for personal use? Or to rip it to MP3 for personal use?
According to this paper published by the Australian copyright office [copyright.org.au], that's correct: "There is no exception in the Copyright Act that allows copyright material to be reproduced for private purposes without permission from the copyright owner."
Paper by who? (Score:3, Informative)
The official body in Australia that handles intellectual property issues is IP Australia [ipaustralia.gov.au], although realistically, copyright is a matter for the courts to decide.
AFAIK, time-shifting and format-shifting have NEVER BEEN TESTED in Australian courts. The legislation is just not that s
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:3, Insightful)
I.e, he was well aware that he was acting illegally.
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:3, Interesting)
If you friend says to you "could you lend me that Cd you just bought". would you say "no, its against the law, you criminal"? I dont think he would be your friend if you did say that often.
The point i am trying to make is that, he may not have seen it as a breach of the law. Music pirates are often seen as people who copy CDs and music and sell them on at a profit.
"These guys didnt make a penny (or
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I disagree. I'm not saying it's *correct* or anything, but the ideas behind free software are incomprehensible to non-programmers, and are therefore easily lumped together with piracy.
Remember, if you can't understand it, it's bad, or otherwise wrong, somehow. And the idea that you should have rights to software for *free* sounds an awful lot like piracy to many average Joes.
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember, if you can't understand it, it's bad, or otherwise wrong, somehow. And the idea that you should have rights to software for *free* sounds an awful lot like piracy to many average Joes.
You're missing the point. That quote wasn't about open source software, it was about the student's knowledge of copyright. This person was a student in an "information technology law course" and wrote a paper on "open source software licensing". A person like this claiming to know nothing about the fact that posting copyrighted works on the internet is illegal is like an accounting student claiming that he didn't know he had to file his taxes every year. If someone knows the advanced portions of copyright law, then they obviously know the basics, as well. That was what the counsel meant.
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:2)
I disagree. I'm not saying it's *correct* or anything, but the ideas behind free software are incomprehensible to non-programmers, and are therefore easily lumped together with piracy.
I have no idea what you're talking about. I have seen free software being compared to Communism, but I have never heard of it being equated with piracy.
-a
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:5, Insightful)
How wrong can one be. What makes you think so? In my profession (medicine), knowledge is completely unlicensed. If you are interested in a particular piece of knowledge, like how to operate a hernia - I am happy to share this with you. No royalties, no licensing fees. You may have to pay for my time if you need me to teach you, buts that's all. After that, you can do whatever you like with your knowledge - share it, multiply it, APPLY it!
It is even tradition in my profession to provide services for free to those who can't afford them - in most countries legislation even compells us to do so (in most civilized countries, a doctor cannot walk away unpunished from a patient in danger of life or limb regardless whether the patient is able to pay anything for the services rendered).
"IP" however is an artefact created by people who either see their purpose in life in amassing as much money as possible regardless of the damage they do to society or by people who would not have any purpose at all if they wouldn't create such artefacts.
Doctors all over the world are fighting drug patents and similar "IP" that actually kill more people every single day than the whole gulf war did.
We certainly have no sympathy for putting people into jail for replicating an indefinite ressource. How can you steal what can be replicated indefinitely?
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:4, Insightful)
*snip*
We certainly have no sympathy for putting people into jail for replicating an indefinite ressource. How can you steal what can be replicated indefinitely?
I think you may be stretching the analogy a bit. As a physician, you're welcome to tell all your friends how to operate on a hernia. However, it would not be appropriate for you to photocopy all of your med school textbooks and give those copies away, would it?
This is not to say that textbook publishers are not, as a species, utterly reprehensible in their practices--new editions annually, ugly markups, etc. However, If I were a textbook author, I still would legitimately feel I had been ripped off if someone were to copy my work.
Your point that concepts in intellectual property--open source, closed source, public domain--can (and should!) be explained to the layperson is well taken, but your comment is equally instructive on the dangers of analogies in law.
Not genius, a small white envelope (Score:2)
Grey hat: "So, you're writing up on the Ng case?"
Writer, peering into empty glass, "Yeah, guess so. Another beer?"
Grey hat: "It's on me. Look, I need you to throw in some comments about open source. My bosses say if I can get the words 'piracy' and 'open source software license' into the same web article, I get a thousand. I'll split it 50-50 with you"
Writer: "Ng did mention he studied software law. I'm sure that includes open source licenses. Sounds OK."
The grey hat is Mic
Re:Hmmm.... (Score:2)
Screw it (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyone ever seen "Born Yesterday"? Great line from that movie that applies here:
"I want EVERYONE to be smart. A world full of
ignorance is too dangerous to live in."
I hate stupid people.
Obvious (Score:5, Interesting)
Obviously anyone that chooses to write an essay for an information technology law course on "open source software licensing" knows at least SOMETHING about copyright. Such as, for instance, the fact that there is a such a thing as copyright law and that freely trading copyrighted material might violate it.
That quote had nothing to do with insulting your precious open source sensitivities. It was about an information technology law student obviously knowing when he's breaking copyright laws on a computer.
Re:Obvious (Score:2)
Obviously anyone that chooses to write an essay for an information technology law course on "open source software licensing" knows at least SOMETHING about copyright. Such as, for instance, the fact that there is a such a thing as copyright law and that freely trading copyrighted material might violate it.
That quote had nothing to do with insulting your precious open source sensitivities. It was about an information technology law student obviously knowing when he's breaking copyright laws on a computer.
Re:Obvious (Score:2)
More likely the prosecution is taking the angle that believers in Open Source believe that "information should be free" and that therefore breaching the copyright laws is not immoral or wrong. I'm not saying the premise it's based on is correct, but it does go to showing that the offender is likely to re-offend, which is the primar
Re:Obvious (Score:2)
I think it was a PR move. Open source has become quite a buzzword and this guy is from the Aussie equivalent of the RIAA. The situation is ripe for him to throw in a few loaded words ofr a good sound bite. Open source is also an often mis-understood phrase.
Re:Obvious (Score:3, Insightful)
The RIAA, et. al, have been increasing their anti-privacy measures as time goes on, with broader and broader sweeps and harsher penalties every time they announce a new round. Why anyone, four years after everyone knew it was illegal, still trades music online and expects not to get in trouble is silly.
Why anyone feels sorry for someone who knowingly and willingly breaks the law so that they can save t
Re:Obvious (Score:2, Funny)
Is that on purpose? Freudian slip?
Re:Obvious (Score:2)
I may not feel sorry, but I can understand some situations. Take someone who listens to a lot of radio music (opinions aside, bear with me). That is "single" music. Producers and execs hope to get one "hit" from the majority of what goes by their desk in the way of demo tapes. If th
Re:Some CDs are more expensive than that (Score:2)
Re:Obvious (Score:2)
Re:Obvious (Score:2)
Sure, but it's much less of an industry buzzword. Anyone who's used a computer would, quite naturally, think they knew what the term "free software" meant when hearing it for the first time: software with zero cost. (Of course there's also the free-libre definition, but you won't bother to look that up if you already think yo
Evil terrorist (Score:2, Funny)
If he knew anything at all about open source, and especially if he advocated it, that makes him an evil terrorist.
Re:Evil terrorist (Score:2)
About time! (Score:2, Interesting)
Piracy advocates used to say that there is no alternative to piracy, that
Re:About time! (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't know about you, but that makes me wonder about our laws. As a fineable offence it would make more sense, but not a jailable one.
Re:About time! (Score:2, Insightful)
Damn straight!
Last time I got pulled over for speeding, I spent 11 months and 29 days in jail. Man, did that suck.
Then a cop saw me walking down Market street a bit inebriated. Instead of telling me to get my ass home, he locked me in the clink for a month.
You won't believe what happened when I got caught jaywalking. Don't EVEN get me started. 12 years in the county lockup for missing the crosswalk by 6 feet! Christ!
Yeah, that's right, every other crime r
Re:About time! (Score:5, Funny)
When I came out there was a motorcycle cop writing a parking ticket. So, I went up to him and said, "Come on man, how about giving a guy a break?"
He ignored me and continued writing the ticket. So I called him a pencil-necked Nazi.
He glared at me and started writing another ticket for worn tires!
So I called him a piece of horse shit. He finished the second ticket and put it on the windscreen with the first.
Then he started writing a third ticket! This went on for about 20 minutes... the more I abused him, the more tickets he wrote.
I didn't care. My car was parked around the corner.
Re:About time! (Score:2, Informative)
It is illegal, but it is not a crime.
More to the point owing someone money that you don't pay them is not a crime. It is not stealing. It is a violation of the civil code. They can sue you and use the force of the courts to force payment.
This is what a simple copyright violation is. A simple copyright violation would be copying a CD or Book you took out of the library, borrowed from a friend or. .
Re:About time! (Score:2)
Mixed Feelings (Score:2, Offtopic)
However sometimes I find myself feeling a little sympathy for the RIAA. I'm sure many Slashdot readers program or otherwise produce software for a living. Do you ever worry that widespread piracy hurts your salary and even your employability? When I talk to average joes who are getting a new computer I ask what software it comes with or what software they're getting and the usual answer is that they'r
Re:Mixed Feelings (Score:2)
I think everybody has pirated something sometime. Whether it's ripping MP3 or making a casette (remember those?) or even making a copy down at kinkos. Technically all those things are illegal to some degree. Up to now the ip holders have not been willing to crack down but now they are.
It remains to be seen how effective suing and jailing your customers will be in the end.
BTW are the laws in Austra
Re:Mixed Feelings (Score:2)
Piracy for evaluation (Score:2)
As a developer (film fx software), I'd not only overlook, but probably encourage low-income students to use pirated versions of my app("third party demo versions", I call them). It's not like it's costing us a sale, and any exposure to our software will encourage them to ask for it when working at a real studio.
OTOH, I frown upon studios using cracks professionally, naturally enough. If you're using the results of my work to generate an income, you should contribute to
Here's an idea (Score:5, Funny)
Open Source Music Licensing
1. Someone posts a blank [ insert fav music editor of choice ] file
2. everyone adds one note and then reposts it
3. After thousands of people have contributed, release it on CD and P2P.
4. Profi... I mean, uh, watch as it dominates the current 800 lb. gorillas of the music arena. No one could match the raw emotion, tonal diversity, and freedom from coherence such a piece would possess.
Except maybe John Cage [bbc.co.uk].
MAGNATUNE.COM (Score:2, Informative)
Re:MAGNATUNE.COM (Score:2, Funny)
"No major label connections.
We are not evil. "
XDD
Re:Here's an idea (Score:2)
Open Source Book Licensing
1. Someone puts a blank [ insert paper of choice ] sheet into a typewriter
2. every monkey adds one letter and then moves on
3. After millions of monkeys have contributed, release it on CD and P2P.
4. Profi... I mean, uh, watch as it dominates the current 800 lb. gorillas of the publishing arena. No one could match the raw emotion, verbal diversity, and freedom from coherence such a piece would possess.
Uh, right. The moral here is that
Jail over an indexing service? Again? (Score:3, Interesting)
It may seem off-topic, but it isn't, really. A movie was filmed consensually. It's being distributed - with disregard to any possible copyright - by one of the involved parties. And the other party involved is threatening lawsuits six ways from Sunday. Pot, kettle, black... You performed a work, you knew it was being recorded, you're well aware of this whole new-fangled "internet" thing, why is it someone else's fault when things start getting distributed? To be honest, the parallel between the Hilton tape and every MP3 out there is quite clear.
I'm disappointed to see that yet more college kids are facing punishment for writing what amounts to essentially an indexing service, but here in the US, that seems to be the status quo. As in, he who has the status, has the quo.
The RIAA is winning because they have money. The ARIA will win for the same reasons. It sucks, really.
Unfortunate connection (Score:4, Insightful)
Nevermind that said movements survive on the concept of copyright and respecting the creator's wishes. Standard copyright doesn't even do that anymore, considering most creators of original content hand it over as a work-for-hire and aren't even able to assert moral rights (most copyrighted work being produced in the U.S. or for U.S. companies). So it's possible the prosecutor is attempting to trace the connection between open source and piracy that simply doesn't exist.
Re:Unfortunate connection (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you really think this is because of some sort of an accident? People believe this because powerful organizations continually make this claim. Whether it's MS, SCO, RIAA or whatever. They spend millions of dollars creating this association in the minds of the public and they have succeeded.
Next time some executive at MS makes a casual connection between open source and (communism/cancer/soc
Re:Unfortunate connection (Score:2)
Expect to hear linkage between piracy and Linux next.
It's your standard propaganda battle, nothing unusual about it.
Don't get too burned.... (Score:5, Insightful)
While the article was poorly phrased, I seriously doubt that it was an attack against the Open Source community. The author was implying that Ng was somewhat about copyright law, and that he probablly knew well that the site was illegal. It was trying to make his infraction seem more blatent, because he allegedly knew he was doing something wrong and still did it. Although, I would see little connection between software licensing and music copyright law, I guess it helps paint him as a bad guy. Bad journalism, definitely; but an attack on the Open Source community, highly unlikely.
UPDATE post SET message = "humor" (Score:5, Funny)
Travelling in a fried-out combie
On a hippie trail, head full of zombie
I met a strange lady, she made me nervous
She was using a sniffer and watching my serivce
And she said...
"Did you use a pro-gram called Napster?
Where students thieve and swap music faster?
Can't you swap, can't you swap a bit faster?
You better run, you better take cover"
Trading songs with a man in Brussels
On a T3 his network had muscles
I said, "Do you use KazAa or Napster?"
He just smiled and called me a hackster
And he said...
"I come from a land down under
Where beer does flow and men chunder
Can't you hear, can't you hear the thunder?
You better run, you better take cover"
Yeah
Trading warez in a chan on the efnet
feds are sniffin my whole damn co-nnect
I said in the chan, "MP3's I got plenty
Because I come from the land of plenty?"
And he said...
"Oh! "I come from a land down under
Where beer does flow and men chunder
Can't you hear, can't you hear the thunder?
You better run, you better take cover"
Yeah
Prison States of the Empire (Score:4, Funny)
Recall that Australia [wikipedia.org] was Great Britain's prison state, during the heydey of the Empire.
What's next -- condemning hardcore Ausssie offenders to Tasmania [latrobe.edu.au]
-kgj
Re:Prison States of the Empire (Score:2)
And let's not forget that America is now infested by the descendants of terrorists who attacked the British King's legally appointed rulers of the North American colonies.
they were surely sitting ducks (Score:2, Interesting)
I have as big a chip on my shoulder as the next
Jail is over the top, but if you wanted to get away with doing dodgy things, these guys failed miserably.
I can think of a reason (Score:2, Insightful)
They are both hated by people with copyright-based monopolies.
Re:I can think of a reason (Score:2)
The similarity is a hatred of organizations that control of the dissemination of information.
There is one very simple solution to all of this (Score:5, Insightful)
We have a free will.
This means nobody is making you buy things at gunpoint.
This also means, that if you stop buying music, stop "consuming" music and overall just don't touch anything provided by these *AA people, two things will happen:
1. You will always be safe from litigation
2. They will be hurt due to lost sales
And there is not a goddamn thing they can do if you choose to take this strategy!
Read a book instead. Or listen to the existing records you might have. Or get an instrument like guitar and learn to play.
'may' face jail (Score:2, Insightful)
You should have see OUR Charles Ng! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:You should have see OUR Charles Ng! (Score:2)
Yeah, yeah, so he killed people and all that... but the important thing to the RIAA and their croonies is that he didn't break the laws on copyright* doing it - allthought it can be argued that he caused them to loose some sales.
*)Unless off course the RIAA and their croonies decides to copyright murder...
The music industry alleges... (Score:5, Interesting)
> it at least $60 million
That's one f*ck of a lot of Kylie!
Let's do a bit of maths on this. A CD in Australia costs around $20-25. Let's round this up to $30, to give ARIA the benefit of the doubt.
An average CD contains about 10 tracks.
I'm going to assume that ARIA used something resembling base-10 mathematics... $60 mill equates to 2 million CDs, or 20 million tracks worth of downloads.
That's one track for every person in Australia.
Let's further assume that each track was a 3Mb MP3 file, which is probably a bit on the low side. The 20 million tracks that were downloaded works out to about 60Tb of data.
Are we supposed to believe that these guys, using a site running from a suburban bedroom, managed to share 60Tb of data? **Maybe** ARIA's lawyer is assuming that each track that was downloaded from this site was copied to another 10 sites, and from each of these to another 10,
Does anyone have any more info on this case? Preferably, something a bit more credible?
Liars... I mean... Lawyers (Score:4, Insightful)
What the lawyer did not say:
The lawyer was making an insidious attempt to vilify Free Software with his questionably legal attack on information sharing. That would be an added benefit for an industry that wishes to eliminate OSs that have the ability to disable DRM.
The record industry is steady on course to destroy all freedom on the Net for a few quarters of profit. This is the essence of greed.
Re:Liars... I mean... Lawyers (Score:2)
Grow up. The prosecutor couldn't care less about open source software (and probably doesn't even know what it means): what he/she cares about is making a strong case against Ng and the essay aims to help prove that the person was not just an innocent infringer, but was aware of the law. Combined with other evidence (e.g. of cloaking the web site), this makes the case against Ng even stronger, should Ng refute the allegations.
You're trying to read between the lines, and in doing so, you're just inserting th
Pirates plunder $200m in musical booty (Score:2)
That's more than triple the Police's (almost certainly already inflated) estimate of $60m - at AUD30 per CD that's around 2,000,000 albums, and yet there were only 7,000,000 'hits' (and probably a lot less 'downloads'). Who's to say that any, let alone all, of those 'hits' would have converted to sales? Even if each were a download, at AUD3 per track (averaging 10 tr
Re:Pirates plunder $200m in musical booty (Score:2)
Does anyone know the address to write the judge in this case? If ARIA is giving false info the the judge, it needs to be brought
Double standards! (Score:2)
It's one thing to copy an mp3 from a pal or grab a song off the internet, but at least you or I are not making money of the labors of innocent artists!
Until the RIAA and organiztions like it clean their own house, I see no reason why people should be held in any way accountable for downloading an mp3, especially when many of the same songs are available free on the radio!
Until talentless hacks like P. Doody ar
Re:Double standards! (Score:2)
don't like the Benjamins but the Benjamins like me (Score:2)
I am well aware of the fact that Combs's publisher usually licenses the original musical works, but I can think of one exception: "It's All About the Benjamins (rock remix)", which some claim contains an interpolation from "I Don't Like the Drugs" by Marilyn Manson. I can find no evidence that Combs's publisher licensed that from Manson's publisher.
Re:Double standards! (Score:2)
He must be mellowing out.
Another website bust (Score:2)
I mean, who illegitimately downloads music from the web? If it happens at all, it can't possibly be a significant problem to industry when compared with the likes of KaZaA, etc.
Behold the Australian Inquisition. (Score:2)
Their grand inquisitor must have done some thinking while he was polishing his instruments of torture and figured that slipping a mention of unrelated blasphemous acts of software development into a story about a court case against three musical hretics is swatting two files in a single stroke
Piracy is a capital offence (Score:2)
Unless, of course, they weren't guilty of violent maritime theft. In which case, why accuse them of it ?
Ouch! Sampling or piracy? (Score:2)
OK, so it's somewhere short of the complete song, but there seems no consistency in test cases - everything from a single line to half a tune has been in some court case or other.
Chris
***********
- Read fiction at www.espressostories.com [espressostories.com]
flushing other's life into the toilet (Score:2)
I think asking yourself this question every time you doubt the effectiveness of a punition may help a lot..
Is it fair? (Score:2)
Ok, piracy is not a good thing, but jail is just a tad extreme, don't you think?
The article doesn't contain much fact, but if the article is resonable correct, then I think it's alright if the people behind have to go to jail. No doubt they knew it was illigal.US: Up to 5 years in prison for $2.5k of sharing. (Score:4, Insightful)
Title 18, Section 2319 of the US Code:
"Any person who commits an offense under section 506(a)(1) of title 17 -
(1) shall be imprisoned not more than 5 years, or fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, if the offense consists of the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of at least 10 copies or phonorecords, of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $2,500;"
You can search the US code here [house.gov].
The same language is going into The FTAA Treaty [ftaa-alca.org], meaning all of North and South America would face prison for the same crime:
"[4.1. Each Party shall provide criminal procedures and penalties to be
applied at least in cases of willful trademark counterfeiting or infringement
of copyrights or neighboring rights on a commercial scale. Each Party shall
provide that significant willful infringements of copyrights or neighboring
rights that have no direct or indirect motivation of financial gain shall be
considered willful infringement on a commercial scale.
In criminal procedures, remedies available shall include imprisonment and/or
monetary fines sufficiently high to deter future acts of infringement and
with a policy to remove the monetary incentive to the infringer. Each Party
shall further ensure that such fines are imposed by judicial authorities at
levels that actually deter future infringements.]"
This is what it has to do with OS licencing (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Overloards (Score:2, Funny)
2 AM? For most true geeks, that's like mid-afternoon.
- Peter
Re:Overloards (Score:2)
Four or five hours of work and it will be time for a nap.
Re:Missing Alphabet (Score:2)
As a result, the 'international' (mostly european based) version of the RIAA if IFPI.
But you are right for the 4 letters limitation.
Re:Good (Score:4, Informative)
Hello? - He's charged with breach of copyright, not theft. One is a civil offence, the other a criminal offence. They are not the same.
Get your facts straight, coward. Thank you.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good (Score:4, Interesting)
In my county, you might be the only inmate.
A friend of mine spent 30 days in jail once back in the late 70s.
When his father needed him to drive a tractor, the sheriff would turn him loose for the day in the custody of his father. At the end of the day, his father would take him back.
They'd also let him out to rake the leaves of the courthouse lawn or to run down to the drugstore for a hamburger or a book to read.
One Saturday night, someone booked for drinking and driving, public intoxication, or something like that broke his tv set. He was a bit ticked off that the sheriff wouldn't let him out for a little while on Monday to go buy another tv set.
Australia's Gaols are nicer than Texan ones (Score:2)
In a minimum security prison (where non-violent offenders like music pirates are usually sent) there is a compartivly low chance of rape or violence.
That said, Australia's gaols are still very awful places and I would judge the
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Ng?? (Score:3, Funny)
"Ng? What kind of name is Ng? I can't even shout it!"
Cheers
Stor
Re:Ng?? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Ng?? (Score:4, Informative)
Mandarin/Cantonese/Hokkien speakers may, of course, correct me on this.
Re:Ng?? (Score:2)
Thats happens to be my surname.
Re:Ng?? (Score:2)
"ing"?
I think those are close enough sounds.
Re:Ng?? (Score:5, Funny)
Thanks for clearing that up.
Re:Ng?? (Score:2)
What I meant to say was, if you were to, say, pronounce the name of polytechnic in Singapore, Ng Ann Poly, you'll say something close to "ggg Ann" with a slight nasal inflection in the beginning. Hong Kongers would probably say it as "mmm Ann".
Really wish I were able to record this in a WAV file or something. :-)
Re:Ng?? (Score:2)
Re:Ah, Australia... (Score:2)
We're threatening to jail 20 year olds, you're giving 12 year olds $2,000 fines and threatening grandma!
Cheers
Stor
Not Black and White (Score:2)
Re:He's stealing. (Score:3, Insightful)
However, computers and the internet have rendered this unnecessary. I can make an exact copy of your car, and you were deprived of nothing. For the most part, I *choose* to have a merely reasonably accurate replica for the sake of bandwidth which can then be further duplicated.
Because there is no scarcity (Even though the RIAA is doing it's best to force artificial scarcity upon us), there is
Re:He's stealing. (Score:2)
Yeah... and I am still waiting for SCO executives to go to jail for illegally distributing, i.e. stealing, Linux kernel in complete ignorance of copyright law and software license it comes with. Why don't prosecutors investigate and arrest these guys? I'm sure if I was distributing or selling Windows 2003 ISOs on my FTP site (without MS' consent), FBI would be knocking on my door in no time.
I'll tell you why - because most of the copyright law, as it exists today in many count
Re:He's stealing. (Score:2)