"Copyright - excuses to copy" Topic

Luckily I think I pass your test. I'm clean gov.

Other blatant copyright infringements you may have been guilty of.

Forwarding someone else's email without specific authorisation.

Watching copyright material on YouTube (You made a copy of it on your hard disc)

Singing a song in public (Happy Birthday to You?) or even worse making a recording of such a public performance performance.

There's many more on pages 543 onwards in the pdf at PDF link

Spacelord, thanks found it

link

You are quite right, taped TV programs can only be watched in your own home or by you. Should never lend them out. I stand corrected.

You are quite right, taped TV programs can only be watched in your own home or by you. Should never lend them out. I stand corrected.

And you should not keep them after you have watched them the once allowed for time-shifting.

Still clean?

Here's a link that's a little less painful to wade through-

link

for anyone who's interested, though at 53 posts and counting on IP infringement, that's probably not many :)

So, we can probably agree that everyone has, at some point, broken a copyright law, even if unknowingly (in the eyes of the law, that's no excuse). Maybe, in some cases, it's less important than others and maybe just because it's the law doesn't make it a moral issue, just a legal one. Also, just because I use youtube and tape programmes from the tv, I'm not about to start dishing out 40K pdfs and pirating miniatures. Copyright Infringement is wrong, but there are degrees and some infringements would do more harm than others.

Just because I have done things which I knew I ought not to have done does not give moral superiority to someone doing them while wishing he did not know.

Absolutely, I'm not defending anyone, especially not recent ejectees from this site. I'm just putting forward the idea that there may be areas were morals and the law aren't necessarily the same thing.

I'm just putting forward the idea that there may be areas were morals and the law aren't necessarily the same thing.

Whilst I agree that disobeying the State when it requires me to harm/kill others is a moral choice. I cannot accept the 'morals' of copying someone else's work illegally. A real choice no.1 (My friends and I think..) for me. So sorry, irrelevant in this context.

I cannot accept the 'morals' of copying someone else's work illegally.

Have you cleared out the video collection? (or have you never recorded anything of the TV and watched it more than once?)

Have you signed a pledge never to look at clips on YouTube? or sing copyright songs in public?

Do you seek permission before taking pictures featuring other people's copyrighted work in the background? Or destroy your pictures if such permission is not forthcoming?

Do you forward people's emails without asking permission to include their creative work?

In short are you a saint? or a hypocrite?

11) It's ok for me to copy some things because other people copy other things.

"In short are you a saint? or a hypocrite?"

False dichotomy.

"11) It's ok for me to copy some things because other people copy other things."

12) It's OK for me to copy anything I can lay my hands on because Lentulus once watched a copyrighted video on Youtube.

In short are you a saint? or a hypocrite?

I seem a perfectly person (to me of course). I know some people use the term sanctimonious and now we have hypocrite being used. Whats the point, do you think personal attacks are useful or even seen as intelligent posting?

No false dichotomy at all.

Either Justin lives up to his own words "I cannot accept the 'morals' of copying someone else's work illegally." (in which case I will happily categorise him as a minor saint though you may disagree) or he's a hypocrite, castigating people for doing things he does himself.

Personally I judge the morality of copyright infringement not on what the the law states (the law is indeed an ass in this case), but on what the consequences of the copying (on myself and on others, particularly the copyright holder) would be.

I don't really care whether anyone here approves of this stance or not.

Since I shall not put words into Justin's mouth, so I will use myself as an example.

1) I cannot accept the 'morals' of copying someone else's work illegally. Do do so is immoral as well as illegal.

2) I sometimes do things that I know are wrong.

I would only be a hypocrite if I said the opposite of statement 2. I am certainly no saint.

Personally I judge the morality of copyright infringement not on what the the law states (the law is indeed an ass in this case), but on what the consequences of the copying (on myself and on others, particularly the copyright holder) would be.

I don't really care whether anyone here approves of this stance or not.

My point is that 'morality' does not apply in the case of choosing to break copyright – its not about saving people, animals or the planet. Morality is a word being used cos people really, really wanna (point 5).

Luckily our approval counts for diddly squat, TMP is a no piracy zone, so no-one can promote piracy here. I just thought it would be nice (with the original post) to poke fun at at the lame (and repeated) excuses give for wanting to break copyright.

TMP link

Piracy

What is recasting?
Recasting is the process of making copies of an existing miniature. Depending on your local laws, this may be illegal unless you have permission of the copyright holder. And even if it's legal, that doesn't make it right.
Can I discuss recasting here?
No.
Can I sell recasts here?
No.
But such-and-such company's miniatures cost too much!
That's no excuse.
I think all rules should be free. Can I use these forums to promote illegal copies of someone else's rulebooks or supplements?
No. When you write your own rules, then you can give them away for free…
I know where you can get pirate CD's of…
Don't even go there. TMP is a "no piracy" zone.

In my book someone becomes a hypocrite the instant they start lecturing other people on the immorality of doing things that they do themselves.

And I fundamentally disagree with point 1) anyway. Current UK copyright law does not allow people to do many things they absolutely should be allowed to do.