511–520 of 535 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is jellyfin any good yet? Last time I looked they didn't really have much for client apps yet.
It is not ready yet. I hope it one day can compete with Plex, but I wonder if a community OSS project like this will take off and create high quality native apps per platform.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Our society is based on the idea that the public in fact does have an entitlement to all IP except trademarks. You need a citation to demonstrate that you aren't entitled, legally, to all IP? That's sad.
The constitution literally describes IP as "for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." with "for limited times" clause in many, many court cases being taken to mean that everything eventually enters the public domain. That's why the CPEA couldn't extend copyright indefinitely like originally planned as constitutionally it all must enter the public dom…
Are you from the moon?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The constitution literally describes IP as "for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." with "for limited times" clause in many, many court cases being taken to mean that everything eventually enters the public domain. That's why the CPEA couldn't extend copyright indefinitely like originally planned as constitutionally it all must enter the public dom…
You're right, none of this is in question, because copyright laws exist. Are you from the moon?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's unauthorized distribution. You don't get in trouble for copying a licensed work, you get in trouble for making it available to others without permission from the current rights holder (or more likely, their hired thugs or your ISP). How would Fair Use and libraries work if copying alone were illegal?
Well Fair Use is specifically about copying limited parts. Public libraries? How are they copying things?
They also don't pay publishers or content creators every time a material is consumed, and they don't employ DRM to ensure that people aren't violating the licences of works that are being checked out. In fact, they don't keep records of people while inside the library, so a content creator can't control how their products are being used and by whom. There are surely some DMCA violations happening at any given moment.
Copyright is an exception to natural behavior.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right, none of this is in question, because copyright laws exist. Are you from the moon?
What part of what I said isn't true?
It is not, see copyright laws.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What part of what I said isn't true?
> Our society is based on the idea that the public in fact does have an entitlement to all IP except trademarks. It is not, see copyright laws.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You did something wrong if that cost you 400$ a month
We don't know how much content OP had stored. Do you know how much public domain, 4k cat videos exist on the internet? I'm sure with enough storage, a proof-of-concept VPS with cloud storage could run that much per month.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are using hyperbole to straw man what is being said. If you go into a store and take a laptop, this is completely different from downloading a movie. If I could, I would download that laptop, and that, too, would be completely different from physically taking the laptop from the store, which robs the store owner from compensation. To use your argument, if I go into a store, look at a laptop but don't buy it, that…
Sorry, I'm not, and there simply is no moral argument for pirating content, because no , if you believe in intellectual property, the is nothing whatsoever different about stealing a laptop and downloading a movie. If you believe in intellectual property, piracy is amoral. It's not pure evil incarnate, but harms more than it helps. And yeah, of course I would download that laptop. Doesn't mean I should!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well Fair Use is specifically about copying limited parts. Public libraries? How are they copying things?
Libraries provide both a system and the materials for facilitating the reproduction of copyrighted works. They also don't pay publishers or content creators every time a material is consumed, and they don't employ DRM to ensure that people aren't violating the licences of works that are being checked out. In fact, they don't keep records of people while inside the library, so a content creator can't control how their…
But just because it's easy to copy does not make it legal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can concede that I am certainly self-entitled and arrogant in many ways, but I fail to see how I am being so here. This project was built as a fun proof-of-concept. Less than a dozen people used it, and none of them cancelled their other paid services to use it. Also, like I mentioned, it was never profitable and I never made any money off of it. Also this is coming from a fellow content creator, of many types (mus…
You’re bragging about stealing the movies and distributing them. That’s not cool. Simple.
You are allowed to backup a movie for your records, which means you can record Netflix shows for later consumption. Those backed up shows watched later are not counted by Netflix’s algorithm, so that production company is not paid.
I’m not supporting one side or the other, I’m raising awareness that IP theft is not so simple when the production companies are still getting paid even with loopholes in the regulation