REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Shove this in your pipe and smoke it MPAA/RIAA

POSTED BY: SIGMANUNKI
UPDATED: Monday, July 23, 2007 15:12
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3643
PAGE 2 of 2

Saturday, July 21, 2007 6:37 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by leadb:
It is not a violation of the copyright if you work out the cords for yourself and use them to sing the song; but publication of the song on the web, as you note, would be prohibitted, as would public performance.



Not exactly.... As long as there is not money being made by a live performance of covers of copyrighted materials, it is legal. It is also legal to put a cover of a song on the internet, as long as you are not deriving advertising income on the site or charging people to listen to it.


-------

Macrovision is a bitch to crack and hardly worth the effort. I recently got rid of over 70 VHS tapes that I thought I would convert to DVD first using an ATI card. Turns out if i bought the infinitaley cheaper China knock off brand, it would have bypassed the Macrovision protection that the ATI card wouldn't, but the quality of conversion seems to have sucked on that card on the reviews. I just returned the ATI card and said goodbye to the VHS tapes. I never watch em anyways, and copying them to DVD was just another way for me to say FU to Big Gov.

In my opinion, nobody has ever been able to come close to matching the effectiveness of Macrovision with today's digital media.



to Fletch: Nobody in America creates anything without being sued unless they are owned by the record label who owns the song they're either blatenly stealing from or might be interepreted by anybody might think sounds kind of like another song made years ago.

Just ask Avril Lavigne. Then ask her what she thinks about Rhianna being able to steal the beat from start to finis, down to the BPM of Soft Cell's "Tainted Love" just last year for her song "S.O.S." without anybody mentioning a word of it.


to LeadB: FAR too many attorneys here. All jokes aside, they are the most souless scum of the earth. I blame them personally for the current state of affairs in the world.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 21, 2007 7:44 PM

FLETCH2


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Quote:

Originally posted by leadb:
It is not a violation of the copyright if you work out the cords for yourself and use them to sing the song; but publication of the song on the web, as you note, would be prohibitted, as would public performance.



Not exactly.... As long as there is not money being made by a live performance of covers of copyrighted materials, it is legal. It is also legal to put a cover of a song on the internet, as long as you are not deriving advertising income on the site or charging people to listen to it.



Nope, that's wrong. If it's recognisable then you can be sued for it, if you are making money on it or not. It's got more to do with it not being worth their while to sue you than them having no right to do so.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 21, 2007 8:58 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


I'll have to find my sources Fletch, but respectfully, you are wrong on this. I know for a fact that if money is not being made than it is okay for you to use it. I'll get back to you.

For instance, if I was playing in a band outside at the park, it's not illegal. If I were playing in a band at a bar, that would be illegal because it would be a draw that somebody was making money off of.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 21, 2007 11:05 PM

FLETCH2


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
I'll have to find my sources Fletch, but respectfully, you are wrong on this. I know for a fact that if money is not being made than it is okay for you to use it. I'll get back to you.

For instance, if I was playing in a band outside at the park, it's not illegal. If I were playing in a band at a bar, that would be illegal because it would be a draw that somebody was making money off of.




I think you're talking about general exceptions, specifically title 17110 section 4

Quote:



§ 110. Limitations on exclusive rights: Exemption of certain performances and displays

......

(4) performance of a nondramatic literary or musical work otherwise than in a transmission to the public, without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage and without payment of any fee or other compensation for the performance to any of its performers, promoters, or organizers, if—
(A) there is no direct or indirect admission charge; or
(B) the proceeds, after deducting the reasonable costs of producing the performance, are used exclusively for educational, religious, or charitable purposes and not for private financial gain, except where the copyright owner has served notice of objection to the performance under the following conditions:
(i) the notice shall be in writing and signed by the copyright owner or such owner’s duly authorized agent; and
(ii) the notice shall be served on the person responsible for the performance at least seven days before the date of the performance, and shall state the reasons for the objection; and
(iii) the notice shall comply, in form, content, and manner of service, with requirements that the Register of Copyrights shall prescribe by regulation;




You would be right in thinking that if you were playing outside for nothing you'd be ok. But you couldn't record that performance in any way or even transmit it "live" in any fashion intended to be received by the general public. So your assertion that you can distribute your covers on the net are wrong, in fact you couldn't even jam off of a recognisable theme and get away with it since you have no right to distribute a "derivative work."

Section 3 gives an exception for live performances in churches but like I said earlier you cant record those performances and give them to parishoners that missed the service.




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 21, 2007 11:30 PM

FREMDFIRMA


I'll make a note to ya Six, that early issues of Macrovision completely ruined the quality of the tapes it was used on, and indirectly destroyed a local video store when those tapes they paid all that money for were returned repeatedly by pissed off customers as unwatchable.

I've despised em ever since.

My girl got some ebooks from some source that uses all that DRM shit, and it takes her almost ten fekkin minutes of rigamarole to get the damn files open, up to and including digging around in her wallet for the credit card used to purchase them, and while I dunno much about DRM, having to repeatedly enter such info into a laptop over and over is a damned security risk in my eyes.
(as part of her annoyance at the frustration and expense, she refuses those books even as a gift from me now.)

I got my ebooks from the Baen Free Library, click, click, read, bought most of the tree-ware afterwords too.
(and damned if they'd put the Belisarius series back on the shelves, i'd snatch them up as well)

There comes a point when overriding, annoying, frustrating copy-protection crap ups the frustration factor to the point where your product is no longer considered worth it's price, especially when you have to stack on the price of all that protection in addition - which is the jackass circlejerk of stupidity that *LEAD* to piracy in the first goddamn place.

So pay 25%+ MORE for a product that has endless hassles and hurdles making it harder to use and less enjoyable or useful ?
Who's smart business idea was that, I wonder?

Imagine a contractor working on a house, who has to punch his credit card, 24 digit business ID number, 16 digit EULA verification, and 8 digit confirmation code into the side of his power drill for EACH hole he drills....

He gonna put up with that ?
Any work gonna get done ?

DRM is asinine.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 22, 2007 1:13 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Maybe I am wrong about the recording. That wasn't how I read the copyright laws regarding it, so long as money was not part of the equation. There are going to be a whole lot of people on YouTube and MySpace sued for that in the future if you're right.

Yours truly being one of them.

Wonder if I'll be classified as a terrorist?



Frem.... yeah I agree with ya 1000% there. Never said I liked the Macrovision either. Just had to tip my hat to the creators, especially when they did get it right later. It's the only protection scheme I've ever dealt with that I actually just gave up on trying to bust. What's the point when I can just go to bittorrent sites and download the movies I had on VHS in a fraction of the time it would have taken to rip the VHS to digital?

Other than that, there ain't a piece of digital media that's protected that I couldn't find the hack to strip all that shit away within 5 minutes. Even WMV/WMA encoding. For those, you have to have the original password for the file, but not all piracy is just about being a pirate. I've bought plenty of stuff that I'm going to backup regardless of what those asshole suits tell me.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 22, 2007 7:27 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Wonder if I'll be classified as a terrorist?

Your an American who isn't a member of the Neo-Conservative movement.

Jesus man, what more proof do we need?



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 22, 2007 9:06 AM

FLETCH2


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Maybe I am wrong about the recording. That wasn't how I read the copyright laws regarding it, so long as money was not part of the equation. There are going to be a whole lot of people on YouTube and MySpace sued for that in the future if you're right.

Yours truly being one of them.




You're shielded by Google. Since they have zillions and you don't firms like Paramount prefer to sue them not you. The jib-jab case is closest to just putting stuff on your website and interestingly the song they used was in the public domain. I have said for a while that with the laws in place now companies will make land grabs trying to take and control PD music by court intimidation.

http://news.com.com/JibJab+beats+copyright+rap/2100-1026_3-5322970.htm
l

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 22, 2007 4:48 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Thanks for sharing that Fletch. I do remember reading that before. I guess I was under the impression that on MySpace, it is considered illegal to host a copyrighted song as your profile song, but if you were to create your own recorded version of it, it's completely legal. I don't remember what I was reading that gave me that impression. Part of me thinks that a large part of their gripe was the fact that a) JibJab got millions of hits because of the video and b) without having ever visited them before, I would assume that they do a lot of advertising in order to even host a site that could handle that bandwidth. You could be right there. From reading this article, it would seem that only Al Yanchovic's covers would apply as legal.


Cit: lol... Pretty much every post I make here is incriminating me further, I suppose. Hey Fletch.... Can they use my posts here in a court of law to try to prove that at my trial?

Never mind.... if I was important enough for them to care, I'd just have a tragic accident.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 23, 2007 2:21 PM

FREMDFIRMA


FYI - that mom the RIAA tried to sue, and extort, and threaten, who never caved or gave in to their bullshit demands...

They got hammered for that, and much as they try to squirm on the hook, are gonna be paying back her legal expenses, whether they like it or not.
Relevant info here:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070625162738896

For mine own, I'd like to see the bastards RICO'd, cause that's what they are, and why those laws exist, to counter and prevent crap like this.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 23, 2007 2:21 PM

FREMDFIRMA


FYI - that mom the RIAA tried to sue, and extort, and threaten, who never caved or gave in to their bullshit demands...

They got hammered for that, and much as they try to squirm on the hook, are gonna be paying back her legal expenses, whether they like it or not.
Relevant info here:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070625162738896

For mine own, I'd like to see the bastards RICO'd, cause that's what they are, and why those laws exist, to counter and prevent crap like this.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 23, 2007 3:12 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


My, my..... how the worm is turning. Nice to know there's a little bit of sanity left in the world. All the luck in the world to her.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Sun, April 28, 2024 13:58 - 6314 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Sun, April 28, 2024 13:49 - 3575 posts
Scientific American Claims It Is "Misinformation" That There Are Just Two Sexes
Sun, April 28, 2024 12:35 - 23 posts
Elections; 2024
Sun, April 28, 2024 09:30 - 2313 posts
Dangerous Rhetoric coming from our so-called President
Sun, April 28, 2024 07:30 - 1 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Sun, April 28, 2024 02:03 - 1016 posts
The Thread of Court Cases Trump Is Winning
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:37 - 20 posts
Case against Sidney Powell, 2020 case lawyer, is dismissed
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:29 - 13 posts
I'm surprised there's not an inflation thread yet
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:28 - 745 posts
Slate: I Changed My Mind About Kids and Phones. I Hope Everyone Else Does, Too.
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:19 - 3 posts
14 Tips To Reduce Tears and Remove Smells When Cutting Onions
Sat, April 27, 2024 21:08 - 9 posts
Russian War Crimes In Ukraine
Sat, April 27, 2024 19:27 - 15 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL