Is peer sharing in bit torrents legal?

[codybrandon1746]

So Corbin fisher won 250k in a suit it filed against a bit torrent downloader? Is it illegal? If so, thousands are liable since a lot of people downloads vids from torrents?

 

[bervin456]

it is illegal. i think you're breaking the copyright and you'll be liable for copyright infringement if i'm not mistaken.

 

[stadiumlove]

Ive always wondered this too... If it is illegal, which I assume it is, I don't understand how torrent sharing sites are able to operate without being shut down

 

[JonHCA]

Ive always wondered this too... If it is illegal, which I assume it is, I don't understand how torrent sharing sites are able to operate without being shut down

Because the files themselves aren't being hosted on the sites...Just ways to access them. Plus I'd be willing to bet that most servers are located in many different countries.

 

[RobinGoodfellow]

It actually depends on what is being shared. If it's copyrighted material or proprietary software, then yeah. If it's stuff meant to be shared freely, such as Creative Commons software, then no. There is some gray area (translated anime not yet available in a particular country, as the company usually allows this to build a fanbase until a translated copy is available in said, for example), but usually it's pretty obvious.

It's because of the legit stuff that torrenting is allowed. It's going to be interesting to see where things go in the next year or so...

RG

 

[Beachguyj]

I think Demonoid moved their servers to Denmark.

 

[codybrandon1746]

u mean people in the US dont upload porn vids in torrents bec they know its illegal? So a lot of these uploaders and downloaders are those outside US?

I am sure that a lof of people here in JUB downloads vids in these sites? Am I correct?

 

[T-Rexx]

Uploading/downloading of data via torrents in itself is perfectly legal. Most Linux distros prefer that you obtain their software via torrents, and make provision for you to do so on their sites.

Uploading/downloading of copyrighted information without the permission of the copyright holder is not legal, at least in the USA. The method does not matter. It is the copying and distribution of copyrighted information that is illegal, not the method of transfer.

 

[AlmondMilk]

I think Demonoid moved their servers to Denmark.

Oh, so that's why it's .me? I never realized the true story about the change of servers.

 

[Beachguyj]

Oh, so that's why it's .me? I never realized the true story about the change of servers.

I think I was wrong

.me is the Internet country code top-level domain (ccTLD) for Montenegro.
The dot-ME top level domain replaced the dot-YU (Yugoslavia) domain previously used by Serbia and Montenegro.

 

[justdra]

IMO, I think the reason a lot of these sites became so popular is because the quality when down, not vice versa. People got tired of paying 15 bucks for a cd when the only good song was the one they released or you pay 15 bucks for 20 tracks but 10 of them are sketches of the artist just talking. I think that is why iTunes (legal) is so popular. People are able to only download the one song for a buck instead of paying for the whole cd. For the ones here that know a little something about the industry, how are companies like BMG or Columbia House able to do this? Do they have a deal with the record companies? I learn to be patient and watch for them to get the cd and amass the ones I wanted for pennies, fulfill my membership and then cancel and wait a couple of months and do it again. As far as porn, I think the amateur sites have ran the BIG companies out of business because they sold their DVD for 50 to 60 bucks each and you can get 2 months of porn from websites for the same price, just different guys who are just as hot or to your liking.

 

[RobinGoodfellow]

Uploading/downloading of data via torrents in itself is perfectly legal. Most Linux distros prefer that you obtain their software via torrents, and make provision for you to do so on their sites.

Yep...however:

Uploading/downloading of copyrighted information without the permission of the copyright holder is not legal, at least in the USA. The method does not matter. It is the copying and distribution of copyrighted information that is illegal, not the method of transfer.

Nope; it's pretty much universal. Whether it is enforced, however....

RG

 

[RobinGoodfellow]

Warning: Shoe drop post.

Currently there are legit sites which you can join to watch movies free, but they are on a paid membership basis. You don't have to pay to hear a track on the radio so why should you have to pay to watch a film on such a so-called 'watch free' movie site?

If you have to pay for a subscription to the site, how is it free? Also, keep in mind that a lot of people pay for radio (Sirius anyone? And even online stations require that you pay for the internet....)

So i am technically commiting a crime by doing so but, i don't see it justly as a crime. Its an industry boosting tool as far as i'm concerned.

There is no "technically" here; you are committing a crime. Period.

because to me, that is no different to borrowing the dvd from a mate, i'm still seeing the film at zero cost to me and at no extra profit to the industry whichever way i do it.

This is pretty much justification BS.


That shoe said, the other: It is interesting that the more a movie is illegally downloaded, the better it seems to do. Avatar was the most downloaded movie, and also the most profitable. Go figure...

RG

 

[fetaby]

Mitch

Then you should be able to walk into a department store, grab a movie DVD, open it, head over to the TV department, watch the movie then decide to buy it.This should be the way. But it's not.

How about going to a restaurant, order a meal, eat it, it wasn't what you expected, then, don't pay.

The restaurant however... I have had meals for free. All it took was relaying why it wasn't what I expected to the waitstaff.

It's more about making informed choices. Modern movie industry is more about trying to "get over" on the consumer. It's so big they have their own argument of popularity. I for one am tired of getting screwed. If a movie grosses 120 million in sales, it doesn't mean it's a good movie. IT just means it was able to sell 120 million worth of tickets.

The expression, "if I knew then, what I know now" comes to mind. I know I don't like shellfish, I don't order shellfish. I don't like crap movies, but there is no way for me know if a movie is crap without investing in it. Lately, that's a gamble that isn't paying off.

As for any of it being right or wrong? We all are just making that up as we go along.

 

[Lord Booticus]

Eh, if you make a product worth buying then l'll buy it. If not I wont. No industries ever lost any money from me because of the internet, only because they've made shitty or mediocre products.

Or I didn't have the money to buy it and then forgot about it then when I remembered again I've tought "Oh yeah, I wanted that ... Maybe another time." and another time never appears because I've moved on.

because to me, that is no different to borrowing the dvd from a mate, i'm still seeing the film at zero cost to me and at no extra profit to the industry whichever way i do it.

Isn't borrowing DVD's and Cd's also illegal? I swear at the start of films it tells you its illegal to lend out films, give me a sec.

Under this UK copyright law it is perfectly legal to lend your DVDs, CDs etc to your friends and family. This may be a surprise to you based on the warning messages that usually pop up when you play a DVD or Video. In fact "lending" is only considered as an infringement of copyright when it is done "through an establishment which is accessible to the public". What this basically means is that it is totally legal to lend to your circle of friends and family.
The question is whether MoviesAtWork represents an establishment accessible to the public. As MoviesAtWork is limited to the lending of material between work colleagues and friends, our understanding is that this website facilitates legal transactions.

Ah, tricksy little hobbitses.

There is no good film i've illegally downloaded that i haven't then gone out and bought.

Ah! But what about people who make shitty movies, hmmm? How are theyn going to make money to continue to make more shitty ... movies? Well if you Uwe Bowl you just exploit tax holes. But yeah, maybe not supporting shitty movies isn't that bad.

The expression, "if I knew then, what I know now" comes to mind. I know I don't like shellfish, I don't order shellfish. I don't like crap movies, but there is no way for me know if a movie is crap without investing in it. Lately, that's a gamble that isn't paying off.

How about reviews? I mean sure its one persons opinion that wont match up with your own, but you do have Rotten Tomatoes. If Rotten Tomatoes has a score of below 30% you can probably be farely confident the movies going to blow. I mean you might enjoy the movie, but if your truely worried about paying for a shit movie its a good away of avoiding them as any. Relatively free

 

[resonance]

I don't think the corporations can sue you for big $$$ for illegally downloading, however. The only means by which they extort sums such as $250,000 from an individual is through illegal uploading.

(Of course, simply illegally downloading without contributing back is generally frowned upon by the torrent community.)

 

[RobinGoodfellow]

I don't think the corporations can sue you for big $$$ for illegally downloading, however. The only means by which they extort sums such as $250,000 from an individual is through illegal uploading.

1) Apparently the corporations can sue. And successfully.

2) It's not "extort"; that implies that they are blackmailing an individual. The individual screwed up, did something bad, and the courts are making him pay for the screw up. Don't do something unless you are ready for the consequences.

(Of course, simply illegally downloading without contributing back is generally frowned upon by the torrent community.)

Yeah....Unfortunately "contributing back" generally means "allow others to download your illegally copies"....

If we're going to have an honest conversation about downloading, it's better to be honest. Downloading illegally is illegal and of debatable morals. Period. What is so hard about that statement to understand?

RG

 

[Beachguyj]

I don't think the corporations can sue you for big $$$ for illegally downloading, however. The only means by which they extort sums such as $250,000 from an individual is through illegal uploading.

(Of course, simply illegally downloading without contributing back is generally frowned upon by the torrent community.)

My family knows someone who was caught when their child was downloading songs from Limewire and they had to pay several thousands of dollars or risk being sued for more. They paid up.

Nothing is going to stop people from downloading music and movies and porn for free.

The Movie studios have gotten smart and are releasing things in 3D which can't easily be seen by most at home. Musicians will have to rely on touting and using their music in ads. Porn producers will have to get smarter or do more low budget stuff.

 

[resonance]

I think you guys are confused. The P2P programs will share for you by default after you download the file. Many clueless "downloaders", such as kids who don't know better, are therefore "uploaders" as well.

In order to discontinue sharing of the file, you must turn off the sharing setting for Limewire (though Limewire is no longer active). For BitTorrent, the means by which to discontinue sharing varies from client to client. For all clients, you MUST share while you're downloading. You should be safe, though, if you transfer the downloaded file to another device and delete the file from the device which you downloaded it.

 

[BearBoi]

In my opinion, the biggest misconception that people have about this topic is in the distinction between the technology of P2P file sharing, and the illegal act of transmitting copyrighted material.

The two are not synonymous.

The technology itself is not illegal. It is technology. It is not inherently good or bad; that distinction is made only by the person who uses it, kind of like driving a car. You can be a responsible driver and obey the laws, or you can be a reckless drunk driver. Either way the car itself is blameless.

P2P networking has a lot of legitimate uses and a largely untapped commercial application. Unfortunately, many major businesses see it as more of a nuisance rather than a potential resource to cultivate. Therefore, they’d rather simply do away with P2P, and to this end they’ve launched a campaign of misinformation, slander and outright lies… most pointedly by insisting that all P2P is illegal and dangerous.

As for using (abusing) P2P technology to commit copyright violations… there is a legal grey-area, since not all countries have the same laws or recognize the jurisdiction of foreign nations. But if you are in America, than yes, you are most assuredly breaking the law. When caught, you can be punished.

Be careful of what you download over P2P, and know your local laws. If everybody did this, than P2P would find itself lauded as a revolutionary technology with major business funding… instead of constantly defending itself and its right to exist.