D
Deleted member 297713
Guest
Now we might get see how other country will judge this case.
Good old pack your suitcases and move on elsewhere.
Good old pack your suitcases and move on elsewhere.
Do you specialise in consistent ignorance? For the last time the High Court judge did not throw the book at Newzbin because they were indexing. It was because they were indexing illegal rips of Blu-Ray filmsThere is no law against indexing. Only UK civil case anyway, sue as much as they want.
It was because they were indexing illegal rips of Blu-Ray films
Do you specialise in consistent ignorance?
I have to question the maturity and/or logic of torrent downloaders. It is like a convicted drink driver shouting from their rooftop they were sent down for only driving and then other drink drivers expressing their agreement at being prevented from driving
It's called an analogy. It'd only be a waste of time to explain again about the blu-ray rips, as amusing as the last thread proved in all these forum members pretending not to know what people used Newzbin for. Not one single law anywhere in the world or any judge in the world prevents indexing. It is only prevented when copyright is breachedHow can you compare downloading to drink driving?
Who's insulting anyone? Ignorance of the law is not a defence. People who download these illegal rips of blu-ray titles seem to think they are unique. They aren't. It is founded on copyright law developed and refined over centuries. See why a Harry Potter fan wikipedia had an injunction slapped against it. I rather think I am actually doing some of these posters a favourDo you specialise in simultaneously making your point and insulting others?
Who's insulting anyone? Ignorance of the law is not a defence. People who download these illegal rips of blu-ray titles seem to think they are unique. They aren't. It is founded on copyright law developed and refined over centuries. See why a Harry Potter fan wikipedia had an injunction slapped against it. I rather think I am actually doing some of these posters a favour
[-]Do you specialise in consistent ignorance? For the last time[/-] [-]t[/-]The High Court judge did not throw the book at Newzbin because they were indexing. It was because they were indexing illegal rips of Blu-Ray films
Newzbin/Usenet are not Bittorrent/torrents.Do you specialise in consistent ignorance? For the last time the High Court judge did not throw the book at Newzbin because they were indexing. It was because they were indexing illegal rips of Blu-Ray films
I have to question the maturity and/or logic of torrent downloaders.
Can someone please point out a law against downloading films/music (not torrent), preferably with a test case. I do not think what LFC trying to point out (downloading) is illegal at the moment.
Torrent is a different ball game, somewhat like as you take a copy, you leave another copy for the next person. So you are involved in copying (in this case uploading).
So this is legal then you say, Spreading illegal copy of games and films?
Well you do know that you can make photocopies of books for references and education. The same way schools photocopies a lot of their tasks from text books.as legal/illegal if you went in a book shop, bought a book but it turn out to be a photocopy done by the book shop rather than a licensed copy.
Well you do know that you can make photocopies of books for references and education. The same way schools photocopies a lot of their tasks from text books.
Anyway apart from libraries I don't know a person that copies a book which averages around 300 pages, would probably work out the same as buying the book.
Of course, everyone knows that downloading is perfectly legal... it's just uploading