You got any music in background? Go to jail!

JoeyDeafNinja

JoeyDeafNinja

Active Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
1,332
Reaction score
2
This is so ridiculous!

URGENT: Congress Wants To Make Streaming A Felony | Demand Progress

I assume Hulu.com have to be banned. Any websites that contains streaming musics or videos should be banned too because of this bill. Can you live without videos you actually missed on tv and you need to see it on website? I could live but WHAT ABOUT ANIME!?!? They are AWESOME. Too bad they have to be stay in JAPAN.
 
I think what this is boiling down to is copyright infringement. Too many people are using copyrighted music in videos they make and posting them online. That's what this is about.

It's a type of plagiarism.

I can understand the ruling on this as the writers and musicians go through a lot and deserve to get royalties on this and sometimes it is hard.

It would be different if someone else was playing the music, like say I sat down to the piano and recorded a copyrighted song, but had the music that I already paid for.

That's my opinion.
 
KristinaB said:
I think what this is boiling down to is copyright infringement. Too many people are using copyrighted music in videos they make and posting them online. That's what this is about.

It's a type of plagiarism.

I can understand the ruling on this as the writers and musicians go through a lot and deserve to get royalties on this and sometimes it is hard.

It would be different if someone else was playing the music, like say I sat down to the piano and recorded a copyrighted song, but had the music that I already paid for.

That's my opinion.
Click to expand...

I thought this will happen sooner or later. One of my terps would download songs illegally because most of the music was bad so why should he pay for crappy music.
 
deafskeptic said:
I thought this will happen sooner or later. One of my terps would download songs illegally because most of the music was bad so why should he pay for crappy music.
Click to expand...

What about ASL music videos made by deaf people? Put them in prison? Talk about discrimination. This is providing "service" to the deaf and putting them in prison violates the ADA law.

Yiz
 
JoeyDeafNinja said:
I assume Hulu.com have to be banned. Any websites that contains streaming musics or videos should be banned too because of this bill. Can you live without videos you actually missed on tv and you need to see it on website? I could live but WHAT ABOUT ANIME!?!? They are AWESOME. Too bad they have to be stay in JAPAN.
Click to expand...

Nope, Hulu wouldn't be banned under this, because they have permission to stream the videos they do. What this law would do is make it a crime to stream a video that isn't owned by you. If you get permission to use the song/video/whatever in your video, then it wouldn't break this law.

Technically this is already against copyright law, they're just trying to make the laws stronger because the MPAA, RIAA and similar entities are losing cash fast because nobody wants to pay for the crap they come out with anymore, so rather than come up with something that people are willing to pay for or sit through commercials for (see: Hulu), they'd rather just make all of their customers criminals.

As for anime, there are some shows that are licensed for distribution in the US, and some of the companies that license shows even stream them on sites like Youtube themselves, so that wouldn't be affected, either. However, fansubbed shows would possibly be affected, though a lot of that depends on whether the shows are licensed in the US or not, since Japanese media isn't instantly covered by a US copyright.

yizuman said:
What about ASL music videos made by deaf people? Put them in prison? Talk about discrimination. This is providing "service" to the deaf and putting them in prison violates the ADA law.
Click to expand...

Um... that's not really how this works. Technically, under the fair use doctrine, ASL music videos could still be made, they just couldn't reuse the original songs themselves. So, you can interpret the song itself and perform that, and you could even play or get someone else to play the background music and/or sing the song, but you wouldn't be allowed to actually play the original song itself in the background.

I'm reasonably sure that fan-made interpretations containing the original song audio wouldn't be covered under the ADA, either. At the absolute most, I would imagine the ADA would provide for the means to sue for not including an ASL interpretation, and even then I would be incredibly shocked if that was the case.
 
I clear understand I heard my friends copyright illlegal song because serious! strictest! that is why!
 
What if I had paid for the song already and I was using it as part of an ASL performance on YouTube? I thought YouTube was trying to not pull the videos of those who are doing exactly that. This is no different than a dance troupe dancing to a popular Gaga song on YouTube to show off their dance skills. No one seems to have a problem with that. I think under fair use, as long as the proper credits are given to the artist with a link provided to where you can purchase the song yourself and you're not trying to make personal profit from that song, you should be fine.

I think this is more intent on those who download music illegally then make 100s of copies to give away to their friends for free, or to sell for personal profit. Although CD ripping has gone the way of cassette tapes. I don't know of anyone who still rips music CDs from napster anymore. That pretty much died out when Napster was forced to shut down and then iTunes came along with it's handy-dandy iPods which easily replaced the bulky, easily scratchable CDs.
 
Dixie said:
What if I had paid for the song already and I was using it as part of an ASL performance on YouTube? I thought YouTube was trying to not pull the videos of those who are doing exactly that. This is no different than a dance troupe dancing to a popular Gaga song on YouTube to show off their dance skills. No one seems to have a problem with that. I think under fair use, as long as the proper credits are given to the artist with a link provided to where you can purchase the song yourself and you're not trying to make personal profit from that song, you should be fine.

I think this is more intent on those who download music illegally then make 100s of copies to give away to their friends for free, or to sell for personal profit. Although CD ripping has gone the way of cassette tapes. I don't know of anyone who still rips music CDs from napster anymore. That pretty much died out when Napster was forced to shut down and then iTunes came along with it's handy-dandy iPods which easily replaced the bulky, easily scratchable CDs.
Click to expand...

Nope, the RIAA has gotten enough laws passed that even once you've purchased something like a song or movie or any digital file, you don't actually "own" it. So your description is still technically illegal, thanks to your friendly DMCA.
 
I am all for fair use, but when people then profit form someone elses work, it is wrong. Either pay for the right to use the music or write your own.
 
StSapphire said:
Nope, the RIAA has gotten enough laws passed that even once you've purchased something like a song or movie or any digital file, you don't actually "own" it. So your description is still technically illegal, thanks to your friendly DMCA.
Click to expand...

Sounds to me like they've got their panties in a wad! :P

However, sites like BitTorrent and PirateBay still operate successfully because they have found loopholes in the laws so they can technically still operate despite its illegality. I know BitTorrent you don't actually download an entire movie from a single source, you actually download bits and pieces of the movie from various sources and it places each piece in order according to it's digital coding. Because you're not technically downloading a single entire movie at once, just bits and pieces of it, they can get away with it. The servers are very heavily guarded against those who try to shut the site down and they have multiple servers scattered all over the place. Doesn't PirateBay also operate in a very similar way?

I wonder if there will eventually be enough lawsuits and laws passed so that eventually you can only download music that will play only on specific media players and cannot be moved from one device from another. Of course, there's always our computer geeks that figure out a way around it. It's a never ending cat and mouse game seems like.
 
ASL Ally actually use songs to signs for deaf, so they can "listen" to music. She doesn't get pay for that but she got spotlight which result got Youtube jealous and tried to remove her account and ban her from youtube if she dare to uplaod at least ONE ASL video. SAD.
 
JoeyDeafNinja said:
ASL Ally actually use songs to signs for deaf, so they can "listen" to music. She doesn't get pay for that but she got spotlight which result got Youtube jealous and tried to remove her account and ban her from youtube if she dare to uplaod at least ONE ASL video. SAD.
Click to expand...

Do they pay the performing rights? If not then it should be removed. How would you feel if you wrote/sang a song, then I added a different video and made it look like my work not yours. It is not right. Of course it would be nice if they did it themselves but you can't just take what you want just because its possible.
 
Dixie said:
Sounds to me like they've got their panties in a wad! :P

However, sites like BitTorrent and PirateBay still operate successfully because they have found loopholes in the laws so they can technically still operate despite its illegality. I know BitTorrent you don't actually download an entire movie from a single source, you actually download bits and pieces of the movie from various sources and it places each piece in order according to it's digital coding. Because you're not technically downloading a single entire movie at once, just bits and pieces of it, they can get away with it. The servers are very heavily guarded against those who try to shut the site down and they have multiple servers scattered all over the place. Doesn't PirateBay also operate in a very similar way?

I wonder if there will eventually be enough lawsuits and laws passed so that eventually you can only download music that will play only on specific media players and cannot be moved from one device from another. Of course, there's always our computer geeks that figure out a way around it. It's a never ending cat and mouse game seems like.
Click to expand...

It's not so much that bittorrent (which is a technology, not a site - The Pirate Bay hosts bittorrent files - think of it like "CDs" and "Barnes and Noble" - one is a type of thing, the other is a place you can get it from) found a loophole to get around to law as it found a way to share that simply makes it harder to get caught. Downloading music/movies/other copyrighted things via bittorrent, at least in the US, is almost certainly illegal. The servers themselves, which host the .torrent files, are the things that are ambiguous as to whether their actions are illegal or not, since the .torrent files basically are like maps, saying "Person XYZ has piece number 51,277 of your download" and then you download it directly from them, so the servers (such as The Pirate Bay) aren't actually transferring the files themselves. Most of them are also hosted in other countries where the laws are different (TPB is in Sweden, for example).

DRM, which is what you're talking about (locking a file to one device) is an attempt that many companies have been doing to try and block piracy. However, it's an ineffective solution (as you said, hackers and developers usually figure out how to "break" it), and even worse, it actually encourages piracy, since if you "purchase" something but have, say, two MP3 players or two e-Readers, and you can't play the file with DRM on both, then it's going to end up being easier for you to just illegally download a copy that will work on everything. This is one reason why Apple doesn't use DRM on their music store anymore.
 
Back
Top