it's only stealing if you take something away from someone - so if i wasn't going to pay to see the movie if even if i couldn't watch it for free, then it would be ok if watched it for nothing - cos i wouldn't have paid to see it even if i couldn't get it for free - right?
if you are working in movies and you can't support yourself perhaps you should give up on a dream you're never going to achieve and step back into the real world.
To read the rest of this proud freeloader's remarks (I only lifted what I thought might be a Fair Use amount) you may find the discussion of Wolverine and some lovely shots of Hugh Jackman in action here:
http://timesonline.typepad.com/blockbuster_buzz/2009/04/wolverine-is-loose-on-the-internet-ignore-him.htmlIt's been an interesting week.
J K Rowling and other bestselling authors took on SCRIBD, and the Times of London reported sympathetically.
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article5998918.ece?Submitted=trueOn a Copyright Alliance blog, a commentator suggested that President Obama's gift to The Queen of England may have set an unfortunate example of piratical behaviour
How about the Queen? Should she have to give her Ipod back? Technically what she did is infringement!
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/first-sale-president-obama-and-queen-englandAnother interesting discussion of infringement
http://blog.copyrightalliance.org/2009/04/whacking-infringement/Apparently, there is a report that someone at the prestigious TED conference has analyzed morality and petty theft, and the conclusions may tend to be rather depressing.
http://blog.copyrightalliance.org/2009/04/a-file-sharing-honor-code/If I read the argument correctly, humans are hardwired cheat and steal if they think they can get away with it, and if they know someone else who does so.
For those artists and writers and musicians who want their copyrighted work taken down from "file-sharing" sites, look at the Footer of the site in question for words such as "Copyright". That's the place to find out what their requirements are for a "Take Down Notice". Usually, you will need a screen capture, and dual processor so you can have two windows open at the same time. You also need an email account that suggests that you are the copyright holder. You also need an ISBN. Not all works have ISBNs.
This, too, is a problem these days.
Here's the form of words that one site requires:
Pursuant to 17 USC 512(c)(3)(A), this communication serves as a statement that:
1. I am the exclusive rights holder for [TITLE OF WORK] ISBN [OF WORK], the titles of copyrighted material being infringed upon, which were published [DATE OF COPYRIGHT/DATE OF PUBLISHING];
2. These exclusive rights are being violated by material available upon your site at the following URL(s): [GIVE THE URLS TO THE DOWNLOADS AND TO THE PAGES OFFERING YOUR WORKS]
3. I have a good faith belief that the use of this material in such a fashion is not authorized by [YOUR NAME] the copyright holder, the copyright holder's agent, or the law;
4. Under penalty of perjury in a United States court of law, I state that the information contained in this notification is accurate, and that I am authorized to act on the behalf of the exclusive rights holder for the material in question;
5. I may be contacted by the following methods
[GIVE YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER, EMAIL ADDRESS]
I hereby request that you remove or disable access to this material as it appears on your service in as expedient a fashion as possible. Thank you.
Please be aware that if you send a take down notice, the site is likely to post a note telling the world that you were the person who requested that the download be removed.