Copyright Question

[Talon87]

Is there any truth to this? I saw this on the Purdue student newspaper's website just now:

To those of you who are afraid of the RIAA: Recently, there has been a scare on the Purdue campus of the RIAA slapping you with a subpoena for downloading illegally. There is some merit to this, but there is one thing they might not want you to know. Downloading is not illegal. Sharing of these copyrighted works is however, illegal. According to the U.S. Copyright Office, "Copyright infringement occurs when a copyrighted work is reproduced, distributed, performed, publicly displayed, or made into a derivative work without the permission of the copyright owner." Downloading falls under none of these categories. In light of this, go ahead and download all you want, just don't share your downloaded materials or you might find yourself in court.

Matt Bohm

Senior, College of Technology
He's a senior in the College of Technology (a.k.a. all of the people not cut out to be CS or ECE majors but still into computer stuff), so I don't know if he's just another idiot voicing his 2 cents on copyright law or if he's actually got a point. But if he's correct, then how come this is the first I hear of if, almost seven years after the infamous Napster lawsuits back in 2000? You'd think that more people would set up filesharing servers overseas (where the RIAA can't touch them) and then say, "All I did was download! :3" if this guy's claim is accurate.

[Raptor Jesus]

Tell that to the people who used Napster, Kazaa, etc. and got their asses sued off.

It's essentially the same as saying, "I was only buying the bootleg, not making it," while the cops carry you off.

[GrJackass]

trying to scrounge up memory of my law class (its been about two years now), but im fairly sure the law goes as follows

it is not illegal to make a copy of a dvd for back up services
it is not illegal to give someone a copy of a dvd as a gift
its IS illegal to sell the copy of the dvd for a profit

they law is basically just like this but just over the internet

it legal to make a digital copy of your dvd
its legal to give a copy of the digital copy of your dvd to a friend as a gift
so technically it is not illegal to give a copy of the digital copy to friends as gifts to 100 people online (mass file sharing)

what napster got caught on was that it was selling ad space and thus making a profit, therefore napster was not fileshareing as a gift but was technically selling the copyrighted material, which made it illegal

this is how the law was explained to me two years ago, i dont know if it is still accurate. hope this answers your question

edit: a dvd might have been a bad example just change it to music CD

[Kasumi Violet]

I think that it's not downloading that'll get you busted it's uploading of it that will (the unauthorized distribution). But then again, I wouldn't know, I haven't talked to any copyright lawyers recently.

[Talon87]

You can't both be right (KV and Gr). But what both of you say is logical. So I'll ask again: which is correct?

1 - downloading music files is not illegal, but uploading them is (Kasumi Violet)

Or ...

2 - downloading, uploading, it makes no difference -- so long as money's not involved (GrJackass)


Because obviously, if KV's right, then the law basically reduces to "downloading music is impossible to do legally" because the only way to download music at all is for somebody to be the sacrificial lamb who uploads it all to the 'net, and said uploader is going to get BUSTED. But if Gr is right, then filesharing is not only legally possible, but the RIAA would be stripped of the basis for their lawsuits.

[GrJackass]

You can't both be right (KV and Gr). But what both of you say is logical. So I'll ask again: which is correct?

1 - downloading music files is not illegal, but uploading them is (Kasumi Violet)

Or ...

2 - downloading, uploading, it makes no difference -- so long as money's not involved (GrJackass)


Because obviously, if KV's right, then the law basically reduces to "downloading music is impossible to do legally" because the only way to download music at all is for somebody to be the sacrificial lamb who uploads it all to the 'net, and said uploader is going to get BUSTED. But if Gr is right, then filesharing is not only legally possible, but the RIAA would be stripped of the basis for their lawsuits.



your avatar pic is perfect for this post

what i posted was a description of the napster trial as explained by my law professor who is rather reputable

but the whole napster case was them trying to set precident law, and they caught napster on a technecality, i dont know if that opened up the flood gates since then to new mass file sharing legislation since then. so neither of us knows for sure

[Talon87]

Coming from a guy who hates my guts, I'll so totally cash that compli-observation. :mrgreen: (Yes, my avatar rules. Very befitting this new webforum.)

[GrJackass]

didnt think you'd see my post so fast, there were edits

plus i dont hate you, i was just messing with you on the clamp photo thing cause i thought it was funny/ according to everyone involved in taking the picture, creepy.

and i also may dissagree with some points on you, but i really do have the ability to disconnect and argument with my feelings for a person, which it seems not many can do (general statement not implementing you)

[Doppleganger]

>>distributed

I think that's your answer right there, Talon.