Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 289 posts

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#31

Post by swarnie »

gmokki wrote: post #20
Sayrus wrote: post #7

> Anyone who uses BitTorrent to transfer files automatically uploads content to other people, as it is inherent to the protocol. In other words, the uploading wasn’t a choice, it was simply how the technology works. What an argument to make in court. It can be proved false in minutes by the plaintiffs.

When I pull the trigger and the bullet kills an another person, it is just how technology works. Why would I be responsible if I choose to use it or not?

I'm going to need a copy of your latest bank statement before i can accurately answer that.

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#35

Post by dizzy9 »

Some of us are old enough to remember when the RIAA sued children for downloading Metallica albums on filesharing networks. They sued for $100,000 per song, an absurd amount when you consider that even stealing a physical album would amount only to around $1 per song. What was bizarre was that courts took the figure seriously, even if they typically settled cases for around $3,000, still around 30x actual damages. The legal maximum was $150,000 per infringement: when a staffer leaked an early cut of the Wolverine movie, the studio could only sue for that much.

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#36

Post by GrinningFool »

willis936 wrote: post #15
lukan wrote: post #2

The world has become so strange. In my pirate youth, I would have never imagined the big companies to argue in courts like this, basically pro piracy. And the activists are now against it, because the big guys are doing it.

It's not like there has been some change in principle and some sort of knife to sharpen. "2005 personal pirate" was about making art accessible. "2025 corpo pirate" is about killing art.

2005 piracy had little to do to with making art accessible. For the most part it seemed more like getting for free the digital things we couldn't pay or and/or felt entitled to, with many justifications layered on top.

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#37

Post by jagged-chisel »

plutokras wrote: post #27
lukan wrote: post #2

The world has become so strange. In my pirate youth, I would have never imagined the big companies to argue in courts like this, basically pro piracy. And the activists are now against it, because the big guys are doing it.

I have no issue with anyone pirating. In my country — and soon in Italy as well — all storage media sales include a small levy (Artisjus) intended to compensate copyright holders for losses from piracy. One could argue it's unfair if you're not actually using the media for copying, but having been forced to pay it regardless, I have no moral qualms about pirating content I don't feel like paying for. By the same toke…

How does that money get distributed? If I create a film, how they decide if I’m worthy enough to receive some of that money?

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#38

Post by RobotToaster »

Sayrus wrote: post #12
Ekaros wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't believe that no one has ever tried that one before... So do we now roll back all of the previous copyright cases where downloading music with bittorrent has been prosecuted?

From my understanding, Meta's use of the pirated book was accepted as fair use and the plaintiffs admitted to no harm. In the case of pirated music and films, neither of those points are made. Copyright holders assume people who pirate would have bought the content, usually even assuming that one download is one lost sale. And I am not aware of a single case where watching or listening to pirated content was accepted…

One of the underlying issues is that punitive damages seem to be the norm in US courts.

In the UK you can only claim for the actual damages incurred, which at most will be the profit you would've made on the sale of that book. Which makes most claims for private infringement uneconomical for corporations.

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#39

Post by jazz9k »

dizzy9 wrote: post #35

Some of us are old enough to remember when the RIAA sued children for downloading Metallica albums on filesharing networks. They sued for $100,000 per song, an absurd amount when you consider that even stealing a physical album would amount only to around $1 per song. What was bizarre was that courts took the figure seriously, even if they typically settled cases for around $3,000, still around 30x actual damages. Th…

Children can commit crimes too.

It's funny, because now in the age of AI, many of the people that support piracy are now trying to stop AI companies from doing the same thing.

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#40

Post by bravetraveler »

jazz9k wrote: post #39
dizzy9 wrote: post #35

Some of us are old enough to remember when the RIAA sued children for downloading Metallica albums on filesharing networks. They sued for $100,000 per song, an absurd amount when you consider that even stealing a physical album would amount only to around $1 per song. What was bizarre was that courts took the figure seriously, even if they typically settled cases for around $3,000, still around 30x actual damages. Th…

Children can commit crimes too. It's funny, because now in the age of AI, many of the people that support piracy are now trying to stop AI companies from doing the same thing.

'Same thing', hah. This was edited out, but I'm quoting it anyway:

> I should trot out all of the justifications here.

I'll start: personal use instead of profit. Certainly a difference, not convinced justification is required or even advisable.

Post reply on HN