«

"Msg. Scooter" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On , , Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:21:50 +1300, Re: Well 3 stikes and you out and
> with No
> solid evidence of it., "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote:
>
>>"Msg. Scooter" <> wrote in message
>>news:. ..
>>> On , , Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:15:04 +1300, Re: Well 3 stikes and you out and
>>> with No
>>> solid evidence of it., "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Mary Hanna" <> wrote in message
>>>>news: m...
>>>>>
>>>>> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes
>>>>> policy
>>>>> to
>>>>> disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid
>>>>> evidence
>>>>> or a
>>>>> court order
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free
>>>>> trade
>>>>> talks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...irates-091104/
>>>>
>>>>Also, makes non-commercial copyright infringement a criminal rather than
>>>>a
>>>>civil offense. Nice.
>>>
>>> It is really quite simple, don't pinch someone elses work.
>>> What is so bloody difficult about that?
>>
>>Yeah, that's grossly oversimplified.
>>
>>I recently got an illegally duplicated copy of a book that I wanted to
>>read
>>but is out of print, and has been for 20 years. It's a collector's item
>>and
>>is hard to find, and if you do manage to find it goes for around US$8000 a
>>copy. I'm not a collector, I just wanted to read it, I own legitimate
>>copies of all of the author's other works, and it's the 2nd book in a
>>trilogy that I have book 1 & 3 of.
>>
>>I guess I should have just stumped up the US$8000 or be prepared to do
>>jail
>>time huh.
>
> In a simplified explanation to you, I would say "Yes, you should be
> prepared to
> jail time."
> You acknowledge that you know that what you are doing is wrong where you
> say
> "illegally".

I don't believe that what I have done is wrong. Illegal, yes, wrong, no.

Not every law is moral, just and fair and I have no compunction breaking
those that I disagree with.

Taking the stance that breaking a law is an immoral act seems to me a very
rigid and authoritarian outlook on the world.

> No matter how you attempt to justify it to yourself and me, you know
> whatyou did
> was wrong.

I don't need to justify it, I have no moral qualms here. I think copyright
terms are too long and I also think that copyright should lapse after a
certain period of time if the copyright holder chooses to stop making that
work available.

> No matter how you attempt to justify it to yourself and me, you know
> whatyou did
> was wrong. It is still theft if you take an illegal copy.

Creators should be compensated for their work by those that make use of that
work but like everything else this needs to be balanced with the needs of
society.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...ctual.property

"Nik Coughlin" <> wrote in message
news:hcvc4s$l04$...
> "Msg. Scooter" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> On , , Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:15:04 +1300, Re: Well 3 stikes and you out and
>> with No
>> solid evidence of it., "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote:
>>
>>>"Mary Hanna" <> wrote in message
>>>news: ...
>>>>
>>>> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes
>>>> policy
>>>> to
>>>> disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid
>>>> evidence
>>>> or a
>>>> court order
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free
>>>> trade
>>>> talks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...irates-091104/
>>>
>>>Also, makes non-commercial copyright infringement a criminal rather than
>>>a
>>>civil offense. Nice.
>>
>> It is really quite simple, don't pinch someone elses work.
>> What is so bloody difficult about that?
>
> Yeah, that's grossly oversimplified.
>
> I recently got an illegally duplicated copy of a book that I wanted to
> read but is out of print, and has been for 20 years. It's a collector's
> item and is hard to find, and if you do manage to find it goes for around
> US$8000 a copy. I'm not a collector, I just wanted to read it, I own
> legitimate copies of all of the author's other works, and it's the 2nd
> book in a trilogy that I have book 1 & 3 of.
>
> I guess I should have just stumped up the US$8000 or be prepared to do
> jail time huh.

Yes.

"peterwn" <> wrote in message
news:d51f14c5-b3da-4e97-b197-...
On Nov 5, 7:48 pm, Peter Hewett <nospamjy...@yahoo.co.nz> wrote:
> Mary Hanna wrote:
>> > Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes
>> > policy
>> > to disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid
>> > evidence or a court order
>> > Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free
>> > trade
>> > talks.
>> >http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...rns-isps-into-
>>
>> pirates-091104/
>>
>> And - why is it being kept so secret?
>> What is there to hide?

To try and prevent popular debate on the matter before state parties
> have initially signed the treaty. those promoting the treaty have so
> far been able to do a lot of work on it without interference from
> opponents, protestors, etc.
>
> The fundamental issue state parties are being confronted with is what
> is a practical and effective way of protecting property interests in
> creative works in a similar manner that owners of real estate and
> other property are protected by society.
>
> It is very difficult to argue with the proposition that owners of
> intellectual property would expect, in a civilised society, that the
> state provides mechanisms to help protect their property rights.
>
> The issue then becomes one of how to protect these interests without
> indue effect on ordinary human rights.

Piracy is theft of property. You will have a very difficult time justifying
that on grounds of "human rights".

"geoff" <> wrote in message
news:usadnYXd2-...
> Mary Hanna wrote:
>> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes
>> policy to disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without
>> solid evidence or a court order
>>
>>
>> Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free
>> trade talks.
>>
>>
>> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...irates-091104/
>
> Is that a 'per user' or a 'per connection' basis ? Seems a bit contrary
> to natural justice to punish a whole household or organisation for the
> actions of maybe one member.
>
>

All internet connections require a contract between the ISP and the account
holder. The account holder then has a responsibility to ensure that all
users of that internet connection abide by the terms of use, which forbids
piracy.

"impossible" <> wrote in message
news:sSNIm.123094$la3.44800@attbi_s22...
>
> "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote in message
> news:hcvc4s$l04$...
>> "Msg. Scooter" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> On , , Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:15:04 +1300, Re: Well 3 stikes and you out and
>>> with No
>>> solid evidence of it., "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Mary Hanna" <> wrote in message
>>>>news: m...
>>>>>
>>>>> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes
>>>>> policy
>>>>> to
>>>>> disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid
>>>>> evidence
>>>>> or a
>>>>> court order
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free
>>>>> trade
>>>>> talks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...irates-091104/
>>>>
>>>>Also, makes non-commercial copyright infringement a criminal rather than
>>>>a
>>>>civil offense. Nice.
>>>
>>> It is really quite simple, don't pinch someone elses work.
>>> What is so bloody difficult about that?
>>
>> Yeah, that's grossly oversimplified.
>>
>> I recently got an illegally duplicated copy of a book that I wanted to
>> read but is out of print, and has been for 20 years. It's a collector's
>> item and is hard to find, and if you do manage to find it goes for around
>> US$8000 a copy. I'm not a collector, I just wanted to read it, I own
>> legitimate copies of all of the author's other works, and it's the 2nd
>> book in a trilogy that I have book 1 & 3 of.
>>
>> I guess I should have just stumped up the US$8000 or be prepared to do
>> jail time huh.
>
> Yes.

Care to explain who exactly I am stealing from? Book dealers reselling this
book as a collector's item? I'm not stealing from the author because the
book is out of print, so he can't make money from it no matter what happens.
Besides which, I've legally bought *every* single one of his other books.

I suppose we should also throw all music pirates in jail right?

Norwegian study:
http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86009/s...an-they-steal/

British study:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...l-1812776.html

Canadian government study:
http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ippd-dp...g/ip01457.html

"Nik Coughlin" <> wrote in message
news:hd0as9$7hg$...
> "impossible" <> wrote in message
> news:sSNIm.123094$la3.44800@attbi_s22...
>>
>> "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote in message
>> news:hcvc4s$l04$...
>>> "Msg. Scooter" <> wrote in message
>>> news:...
>>>> On , , Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:15:04 +1300, Re: Well 3 stikes and you out
>>>> and with No
>>>> solid evidence of it., "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"Mary Hanna" <> wrote in message
>>>>>news: om...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes
>>>>>> policy
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid
>>>>>> evidence
>>>>>> or a
>>>>>> court order
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free
>>>>>> trade
>>>>>> talks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...irates-091104/
>>>>>
>>>>>Also, makes non-commercial copyright infringement a criminal rather
>>>>>than a
>>>>>civil offense. Nice.
>>>>
>>>> It is really quite simple, don't pinch someone elses work.
>>>> What is so bloody difficult about that?
>>>
>>> Yeah, that's grossly oversimplified.
>>>
>>> I recently got an illegally duplicated copy of a book that I wanted to
>>> read but is out of print, and has been for 20 years. It's a collector's
>>> item and is hard to find, and if you do manage to find it goes for
>>> around US$8000 a copy. I'm not a collector, I just wanted to read it, I
>>> own legitimate copies of all of the author's other works, and it's the
>>> 2nd book in a trilogy that I have book 1 & 3 of.
>>>
>>> I guess I should have just stumped up the US$8000 or be prepared to do
>>> jail time huh.
>>
>> Yes.
>
> Care to explain who exactly I am stealing from?

The copyright holder.

> Book dealers reselling this book as a collector's item?

No. The copyright holder. You have no right to their property.

> I'm not stealing from the author because the book is out of print, so he
> can't make money from it no matter what happens.

Has the copyright expired? If not, you've infringed on copyright. Whether or
not the copyright holder can, or wants to, make money from their work is
completely beside the point. Without the permission of the copyright holder,
you have no right to a copy of their work.

> Besides which, I've legally bought *every* single one of his other books.
>

Don't be ridiculous! Just because you obey the law 364 days a year doesn't
entitle you to violate it on the 365th.

> I suppose we should also throw all music pirates in jail right?
>

Cutting off an internet pirate's internet connection seems sufficent in most
cases.

> Norwegian study:
> http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86009/s...an-they-steal/
>
> British study:
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...l-1812776.html
>
> Canadian government study:
> http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ippd-dp...g/ip01457.html

LOL. Exatly how many $8000 books have you purchased since stealing the one
you wanted.

"impossible" <> wrote in message
news:%AOIm.117404$5n1.111584@attbi_s21...
>
> "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote in message
> news:hd0as9$7hg$...
>> "impossible" <> wrote in message
>> news:sSNIm.123094$la3.44800@attbi_s22...
>>>
>>> "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote in message
>>> news:hcvc4s$l04$...
>>>> "Msg. Scooter" <> wrote in message
>>>> news:...
>>>>> On , , Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:15:04 +1300, Re: Well 3 stikes and you out
>>>>> and with No
>>>>> solid evidence of it., "Nik Coughlin" <> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Mary Hanna" <> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:4fm4f599cnnoo01etk541ha643b70tun3n@4ax. com...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Among other things, the ACTA draft calls for a global three-strikes
>>>>>>> policy
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> disconnect alleged file-sharers from the Internet, without solid
>>>>>>> evidence
>>>>>>> or a
>>>>>>> court order
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Seems that we will be in the same boat If Ozz is, plus the US free
>>>>>>> trade
>>>>>>> talks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://torrentfreak.com/secret-anti-...irates-091104/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Also, makes non-commercial copyright infringement a criminal rather
>>>>>>than a
>>>>>>civil offense. Nice.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is really quite simple, don't pinch someone elses work.
>>>>> What is so bloody difficult about that?
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, that's grossly oversimplified.
>>>>
>>>> I recently got an illegally duplicated copy of a book that I wanted to
>>>> read but is out of print, and has been for 20 years. It's a
>>>> collector's item and is hard to find, and if you do manage to find it
>>>> goes for around US$8000 a copy. I'm not a collector, I just wanted to
>>>> read it, I own legitimate copies of all of the author's other works,
>>>> and it's the 2nd book in a trilogy that I have book 1 & 3 of.
>>>>
>>>> I guess I should have just stumped up the US$8000 or be prepared to do
>>>> jail time huh.
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>
>> Care to explain who exactly I am stealing from?
>
> The copyright holder.
>
>> Book dealers reselling this book as a collector's item?
>
> No. The copyright holder. You have no right to their property.

The Theft Act: "A person is guilty of theft, if he dishonestly appropriates
property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving
the other of it"

Oh dear, it appears that they no longer have their property as I have
permanently deprived them of it... oh, wait.

>> I'm not stealing from the author because the book is out of print, so he
>> can't make money from it no matter what happens.
>
> Has the copyright expired? If not, you've infringed on copyright. Whether
> or not the copyright holder can, or wants to, make money from their work
> is completely beside the point. Without the permission of the copyright
> holder, you have no right to a copy of their work.

Why not?

Because I did not purchase a physical copy of one of the extremely limited
print runs?

What if I borrowed the book from someone and read it, then gave it back to
the owner?

Please explain to me why that would be OK but printing a copy and reading it
isn't.

>> Besides which, I've legally bought *every* single one of his other books.
>>
>
> Don't be ridiculous! Just because you obey the law 364 days a year doesn't
> entitle you to violate it on the 365th.

I don't obey the law 365 days a year, I only obey laws that I think are fair
and just.

Non-commercial copyright is not currently a criminal offence and nor should
it become one.

Copyright is seriously broken.

We live in a world where the song Happy Birthday must be licensed to be
performed in public:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_B...pyright_status

"The origins of "Happy Birthday To You" date back to the mid-nineteenth
century"
"The song is currently set to pass in to the public domain in 2030."

I do not obey laws that I consider unjust or ridiculous. Nor should anyone.

>> I suppose we should also throw all music pirates in jail right?
>>
>
> Cutting off an internet pirate's internet connection seems sufficent in
> most cases.

And that of their family and anybody else who they live with?

With no due process, merely an accusation being sufficient?

Coming from the industry that accuses laser printers of copyright
infringement?

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/06/05...-indust-1.html

But that's not the point, the point is that this new law, along with this
provision of internet disconnection, changes non-commerical copyright
infringement from being a civil matter to a criminal one.

>> Norwegian study:
>> http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86009/s...an-they-steal/
>>
>> British study:
>> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...l-1812776.html
>>
>> Canadian government study:
>> http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ippd-dp...g/ip01457.html
>
> LOL. Exatly how many $8000 books have you purchased since stealing the
> one you wanted.

What does the price point have to do with anything?

Nothing, aside from it being an insurmountable obstacle for me to enjoy an
important work, which I have harmed nobody by doing, nor deprived anybody of
anything.

At the same time I bought two more books from the same author, the other two
in the trilogy, the first of which was bloody expensive as it was also out
of print, but thankfully not a collector's item as is the 2nd (which had a
smaller print run), which completed my collection of his works.

And damn right I'll buy a legitimate copy of the 2nd book if they ever
reprint it, you think I like having a print out of a PDF sitting in my book
shelf amongst all the other nice books?

"Msg. Scooter" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor
> to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
> Anatole France.

Have you read the Red Lily? That whole passage drips with sarcasm:

"For the poor it consists in sustaining and preserving the wealthy in their
power and their laziness. The poor must work for this, in presence of the
majestic quality of the law which prohibits the wealthy as well as the poor
from sleeping under the bridges, from begging in the streets, and from
stealing bread. That is one of the good effects of the Revolution. As this
Revolution was made by fools and idiots for the benefit of those who
acquired national lands, and resulted in nothing but making the fortune of
crafty peasants and financiering bourgeois, the Revolution only made
stronger, under the pretence of making all men equal, the empire of wealth.
It has betrayed France into the hands of the men of wealth. They are masters
and lords. The apparent government, composed of poor devils, is in the pay
of the financiers. For one hundred years, in this poisoned country, whoever
has loved the poor has been considered a traitor to society. A man is called
dangerous when he says that there are wretched people. There are laws
against indignation and pity, and what I say here could not go into print."

On Nov 6, 6:00*pm, "impossible" <impossi...@nospam.net> wrote:

>
> All internet connections require a contract between the ISP and the account
> holder. The account holder then has a responsibility to ensure that all
> users of that internet connection abide by the terms of use, which forbids
> piracy.

Thanks for advising us of Microsoft's stance on this matter, since you
seem to be their mouthpiece on ng's.

On , , Fri, 6 Nov 2009 01:22:13 -0800 (PST), Re: Well 3 stikes and you out and
with No solid evidence of it., peterwn <> wrote:

>On Nov 6, 6:00*pm, "impossible" <impossi...@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> All internet connections require a contract between the ISP and the account
>> holder. The account holder then has a responsibility to ensure that all
>> users of that internet connection abide by the terms of use, which forbids
>> piracy.
>
>Thanks for advising us of Microsoft's stance on this matter, since you
>seem to be their mouthpiece on ng's.

Pretty much like you being the National Parties mouthpiece on this group.

--
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor
to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
Anatole France.