15 posts • joined 3 Nov 2008
You might be right that there is nothing illegal about downloading copyright content per se, but I think you might have a hard time convincing a US court that this is the case when you do it without the permission of the rights owner. However, you might say there is a case for a fair use defence, though the illegal nature of the source and the fact that the film had not been released could possibly count against you.
"...terminated Mr Freidman"?
NewsCorp says death to copyright infringers!
So, let me get this straight: Asus and Lenovo were joint first place - that would put Apple in third place then?
What if there is no answer to a question?
Perhaps it could make one up and then put it in wikipedia so that it is true.
Real snow leopards are cuter than any operating system:
@ Vincent Ballard
You're quite right to pick up on that - should have been ηβικός παιδεία.
Re: Re: I smell twatshite
You're not still refering to that Booke of the Wuyrde crap are you? Even contemporary scholars knew that it was a flawed source, given that it consisted of random words made up by the then well-known cult of the Pubic Education, στωικός παιδεία, or ibikos paideia, though they were also sometimes known as Βικιπαίδεια or Bikipaideia, the Biscuit Education.
Whatever their actual name, I think Chaucer makes a reference to their leader, Iannes of Whaeles, calling him a "totalle queynte".
Phew, only nudie pics
Just think, if they had been pictures of breastfeeding, Facebook would have been all in a tizz and removed them.
Um... (part deux)
Perhaps I shouldn't have made the mistake of leaving out basic statements of comprehension - I know the meaning of 'sic', but thanks anyway. I am simply unsure as to why it is being used. Clearly 'my wife and daughter' is wrong in a literal sense (they have nothing to do with the fake Chuck) but it follows the first person narrative being used in the rest of the blog. And I'm with Peyton on the identification thing.
@AC no.2: did you get that answer from wikipedia, failing to notice the word 'erroneously'?
"The identification of my wife and daughter [sic] is not privacy-invasive at all"
Can someone tell me why there is a patch of puke in this sentence? Am I missing something?
That first @umacf24 Mark wasn't me
I would never write the word fuck on a public site.
" It's not hard to refer to the copyright and designs acts to find out what soft of copying is legal. "
Copyright also needs topic-specific knowledge, especially to find meaning in the case law. The legality of each sort of copying is easy to ascertain, but whether the copying you actually do is ok is a different matter, certainly in terms of extent. Care to define "substantial"?
"What's a bit mind boggling is to realise that anyone in the UK (it's different in the States) who rips a CD for their own MP3 player is breaking the criminal law...."
This would be a civil matter - the copyright owners could sue you for damages but Inspector Knacker would only come to call if you starting selling copies.
It's ok, I've already got my coat on and am halfway out of the door...
Who suggested using twitfelch? (I don't dare google that one at work)
PH - might let you
is there something in the contract that lets you off the hook if it is stolen or do you remain liable forever?
PH - should have had a no onselling contract for those 'documentaries' she made.