Downloading Movies

Fol20

Hi all!

I was talking to a friend today who thinks its the illegal side of downloading comes from sharing the content.
Is it true that it is ok to download stuff but not share it?

This cant be true can it

slimjimmc

It depends.
Downloads are usually illegal because you have no permission to have them...
a) because the source you downloaded from does not have proper distribution rights.
b) you bypassed their security/account controls.
c) you obtained a copy from someone who did not have proper distribution rights (that includes your mates giving you a duplicate) even if they downloaded legitimately.
d) you legitimately downloaded the content but you're are using it in a manner contrary to the licence, e.g. using it in your business/workplace, allowing the public enjoy it, etc.
There are probably other reasons too.

I suspect your friend is only thinking of (c) and has not considered the others.

blueythebear

Fol20 wrote: »

Hi all!

I was talking to a friend today who thinks its the illegal side of downloading comes from sharing the content.
Is it true that it is ok to download stuff but not share it?

This cant be true can it

See Section 37 2) of the Copyright and Related Acts 2000 which holds that copyright is infringed by the act of copying the work that is allegedly copyright.

I suspect your friend is thinking of the fact that ISP's only attempt to chase those that make copyright materials available for download. THey generally will not chase someone who purely downloads and does not share. It's a question of resources as they can't monitor everyone all the time.

Fol20

(2) The copyright in a work is infringed by a person who without the licence of the copyright owner undertakes, or authorises another to undertake, any of the acts restricted by copyright.

Who is the copyright owner here,universal or the person who bought the movie and converted it to avi

blueythebear

Fol20 wrote: »

(2) The copyright in a work is infringed by a person who without the licence of the copyright owner undertakes, or authorises another to undertake, any of the acts restricted by copyright.

Who is the copyright owner here,universal or the person who bought the movie and converted it to avi

Person who bought the movie has only bought the movie for personal use. To distribute it, they would have to get a specific license from the copyright owner to do so. The copyright owner would be the author of the work (which is usually the director of the movie, but they would have signed the copyright to the movie studio in return for funding the movie) so it would be warner bros or universal or whoever the studio was.

I think the appropriate section is actually S37 i), my bad.

Fol20

What you are describing sounds a lot like what my friend is saying - It is illegal to share content but there is no mention of it being illegal to download and use content

FloatingVoter

If you're using torrents to obtain the material you're both downloading and uploading at the same time (thats the sharing aspect). A lot of people will say "I downloaded a torrent" - they did, while they were downloading they were also aiding in the distribution by uploading.
That is still perfectly legal.
When the content is copyrighted thats when the illegality comes in.

blueythebear

Fol20 wrote: »

What you are describing sounds a lot like what my friend is saying - It is illegal to share content but there is no mention of it being illegal to download and use content

No, it's illegal to make a copy of copyright material. So if you download a copy of the latest movie without paying for it, the very act of downloading it is breaching copyright.

It doesn't matter if you share it or not. You are breaking the law by downloading it in the first place.

Fol20

blueythebear wrote: »

No, it's illegal to make a copy of copyright material. So if you download a copy of the latest movie without paying for it, the very act of downloading it is breaching copyright.

It doesn't matter if you share it or not. You are breaking the law by downloading it in the first place.

What law is this?
A bit vague i know but i just want to know what law it is

maggy_thatcher

blueythebear wrote: »

No, it's illegal to make a copy of copyright material.

Not 100% correct. It's illegal to make a copy of copyright material without a licence. Otherwise you'd never be able to access anything on the internet (the very nature of downloading *anything* on the internet makes a copy of it). Similarly some licencing agreements allow for re-distribution of copyrighted material -- for example, anything Open-Source is still copyrighted, it's just that there is a licence agreement associated with it that provides circumstances in which the work can be redistributed.

FreudianSlippers

Fol20 wrote: »

What law is this?
A bit vague i know but i just want to know what law it is

Section 37 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act, 2000

(1) Subject to the exceptions specified in Chapter 6 and to any provisions relating to licensing in this Part, the owner of the copyright in a work has the exclusive right to undertake or authorise others to undertake all or any of the following acts, namely:

(a) to copy the work;

(b) to make available to the public the work;

(c) to make an adaptation of the work or to undertake either of the acts referred to in paragraph (a) or (b) in relation to an adaptation,

and those acts shall be known and in this Act referred to as “acts restricted by copyright”.

(2) The copyright in a work is infringed by a person who without the licence of the copyright owner undertakes, or authorises another to undertake, any of the acts restricted by copyright.

(3) References to the undertaking of an act restricted by the copyright in a work shall relate to the work as a whole or to any substantial part of the work and to whether the act is undertaken directly or indirectly.

Already posted earlier in the thread, but this is the full text.

Pat Mustard

Whilst it is illegal to copy the content, I haven't heard of anyone getting caught for copying copyright material.

People get caught for sharing or uploading the material, because as one poster correctly stated, when you download, you also upload material at the same time, due to the way that the file sharing client program is configured.

blueythebear

maggy_thatcher wrote: »

Not 100% correct. It's illegal to make a copy of copyright material without a licence. Otherwise you'd never be able to access anything on the internet (the very nature of downloading *anything* on the internet makes a copy of it). Similarly some licencing agreements allow for re-distribution of copyrighted material -- for example, anything Open-Source is still copyrighted, it's just that there is a licence agreement associated with it that provides circumstances in which the work can be redistributed.

You are correct but you are splitting hairs at the same time. It's blatantly obvious that we are not talking about a scenario where the downloader has permission to download the impugned material.

blueythebear

The Mustard wrote: »

Whilst it is illegal to copy the content, I haven't heard of anyone getting caught for copying copyright material.

People get caught for sharing or uploading the material, because as one poster correctly stated, when you download, you also upload material at the same time, due to the way that the file sharing client program is configured.

I also have not heard of mere downloaders (in Ireland) being done for copyright infringement. As has been stated already, those that share (and upload) are in the firing line from ISPs but that is not to say that they won't change their tune in the future. At the moment, the Eircom "three strikes" policy is not compulsory on the other ISP's so only Eircom implement it at the minute as far as I'm aware.

Pat Mustard

blueythebear wrote: »

At the moment, the Eircom "three strikes" policy is not compulsory on the other ISP's so only Eircom implement it at the minute as far as I'm aware.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Irish legislation were to be updated in future, to force all of the ISPs to implement a "three strikes" type system like Eircom has.

See the French "HADOPI" law and the UK Digital Econonmy Act. Probably just a matter of time before we have something similar here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Economy_Act_2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HADOPI_law

blueythebear

The Mustard wrote: »

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Irish legislation were to be updated in future, to force all of the ISPs to implement a "three strikes" type system like Eircom has.

See the French "HADOPI" law and the UK Digital Econonmy Act. Probably just a matter of time before we have something similar here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Economy_Act_2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HADOPI_law

That was alluded to in the recent UPC case by Mr Justice Charlton. He essentially said that he wished he could grant the injunction that EMI sought (preventing UPC customers accessing the Pirate Bay.org website) but that Irish legislation did not allow for it.

He went on to say:

"the legislative response laid down in our country in the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000, ... has made no proper provision for the blocking, diverting or interrupting of internet communications intent on breaching copyright. In failing to provide legislative provisions ....Ireland is not yet fully in compliance with its obligations under European law."

I'm sure it's just a matter of time before this is addressed through legislation here.

amen

No, it's illegal to make a copy of copyright material

Can you not make a backup copy of the copyrighted material?

Del2005

blueythebear wrote: »

That was alluded to in the recent UPC case by Mr Justice Charlton. He essentially said that he wished he could grant the injunction that EMI sought (preventing UPC customers accessing the Pirate Bay.org website) but that Irish legislation did not allow for it.

He went on to say:

"the legislative response laid down in our country in the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000, ... has made no proper provision for the blocking, diverting or interrupting of internet communications intent on breaching copyright. In failing to provide legislative provisions ....Ireland is not yet fully in compliance with its obligations under European law."

I'm sure it's just a matter of time before this is addressed through legislation here.

Typical Ireland wants to block as the UK drops blocking

valleyoftheunos

amen wrote: »

Can you not make a backup copy of the copyrighted material?

No, this is a common misapprehension.

Orion

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

No, this is a common misapprehension.

Bollox. It is perfectly legitimate to make a copy of content for your own personal use despite what IMRO says. When I buy a CD the first thing I do it rip it to a high bitrate mp3 or ogg and put it on my phone (which is my media player). I am not buying the distribution medium - I am buying the content. And anyone who says I am breaking the law is talking bollox afaic until there is case law to back up that argument.

blueythebear

Orion wrote: »

Bollox. It is perfectly legitimate to make a copy of content for your own personal use despite what IMRO says. When I buy a CD the first thing I do it rip it to a high bitrate mp3 or ogg and put it on my phone (which is my media player). I am not buying the distribution medium - I am buying the content. And anyone who says I am breaking the law is talking bollox afaic until there is case law to back up that argument.

If you read the thread, S37 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 has been reproduced. S37 i) lists the acts restricted by copyright and S37 (2) clearly states that copyright is infringed by a person who without a license performs one of the restricted acts. One of those acts is to make a copy of the work.

I believe the ambiguity lies in the distinction between civil and criminal sanctions. To put it very generally, it is a criminal offence to breach copyright for in the course of business of for profit so that the guy selling dodgy DVD's from a suitcase is committing a criminal offence.

However, backing up one's own record collection is not a criminal offence if it is for private use. You are still breaching copyright but the author would only have a civil remedy against you.

valleyoftheunos

Orion wrote: »

Bollox. It is perfectly legitimate to make a copy of content for your own personal use despite what IMRO says. When I buy a CD the first thing I do it rip it to a high bitrate mp3 or ogg and put it on my phone (which is my media player). I am not buying the distribution medium - I am buying the content. And anyone who says I am breaking the law is talking bollox afaic until there is case law to back up that argument.

just because you feel entitled to doesn't mean you aren't violating copyright.

And as for whether you are buying the content, that is the subject of many arguments, do you by it or do you buy the license to listen it? Many parties would suggest that you buy the distribution medium and merely license the content, hence no "backup copies."

aacs

Yeah you are right. But regardless of that an act of downloading movies without any implied or expressed permission of original copyright holder is an illegal act. And distributing such copies of movie makes it even more serious crime. So distribution of video copy copy becomes serious offence to take note of legal authorities. Hence in general it is considered that you can download movies but cannot distribute it.

superstoner90

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZm8vNHBSU

did you not ever see this on the start of s movie?:eek:

Orion

valleyoftheunos wrote: »

just because you feel entitled to doesn't mean you aren't violating copyright.

And as for whether you are buying the content, that is the subject of many arguments, do you by it or do you buy the license to listen it? Many parties would suggest that you buy the distribution medium and merely license the content, hence no "backup copies."

Parties who suggest that are vested interests and while they perpetuate that rubbish they don't try to enforce it. It's that attitude by the media companies that has led them to be ignored by many people. Instead of embracing technology they fought it. As far as I'm concerned, and until there is a test case in Ireland, I am buying the content and I can and will listen to it in whatever format I desire once purchased.

And I don't consider it a groundless entitlement. Chapter 6 of the Act provides exceptions for private study. Listening to music on my media player is private study. And as I said earlier until there is case law that is my opinion on the law as it currently stands. And tbh any contrary opinion is also just that. We may have to agree to disagree until a judge rules on it

blueythebear

Orion wrote: »

Parties who suggest that are vested interests and while they perpetuate that rubbish they don't try to enforce it. It's that attitude by the media companies that has led them to be ignored by many people. Instead of embracing technology they fought it. As far as I'm concerned, and until there is a test case in Ireland, I am buying the content and I can and will listen to it in whatever format I desire once purchased.

And I don't consider it a groundless entitlement. Chapter 6 of the Act provides exceptions for private study. Listening to music on my media player is private study. And as I said earlier until there is case law that is my opinion on the law as it currently stands. And tbh any contrary opinion is also just that. We may have to agree to disagree until a judge rules on it

Off you go. Back up your CD's and try and rely on the "private study" exception. All I have done is state the law and the potential consequences of the breach of same. It is completely your choice. The discussion is about what is against the law and what is not.

Backing up your music breaches copyright law unless that action falls within one of the exceptions, one of which is "private study". You're dead right in that this has not been sufficiently outlined in court but on my reading of the relevant statutes, backing up your music does not come under the "private study" exception (and I believe it would be an extremely difficult argument to make to a judge). However, it is your choice if you want to argue that sort of a point in a court.

The practical fact of the matter is that interested parties are never going to find out if you have backed up your music onto CD or whatever so it's a moot point. Copy away. but the fact is that if you are caught, you should be aware that what you are doing in copying is a breach of copyright.