• 0 Posts
  • 40 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 29th, 2024

help-circle
  • Right, so the owners have their rights enshrined in laws to make copies, sales, and derivatives, but that doesn’t mean people other than owners are breaking a law by downloading a copy that a third party made and distributed. In fact, that text alone doesn’t make it illegal to make copies, derivatives, or distributions, that would instead be outlined in U.S Code Title 17 Chapter 5 Section 506 which says:

    §506. Criminal offenses

    (a) Criminal Infringement.—

    (1) In general.—Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed—

    (A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;

    (B) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180–day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000; or

    (C) by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution.

    (2) Evidence.—For purposes of this subsection, evidence of reproduction or distribution of a copyrighted work, by itself, shall not be sufficient to establish willful infringement of a copyright.

    (3) Definition.—In this subsection, the term “work being prepared for commercial distribution” means—

    (A) a computer program, a musical work, a motion picture or other audiovisual work, or a sound recording, if, at the time of unauthorized distribution—

    (i) the copyright owner has a reasonable expectation of commercial distribution; and

    (ii) the copies or phonorecords of the work have not been commercially distributed; or

    (B) a motion picture, if, at the time of unauthorized distribution, the motion picture—

    (i) has been made available for viewing in a motion picture exhibition facility; and

    (ii) has not been made available in copies for sale to the general public in the United States in a format intended to permit viewing outside a motion picture exhibition facility.

    (b) Forfeiture, Destruction, and Restitution.—Forfeiture, destruction, and restitution relating to this section shall be subject to section 2323 of title 18, to the extent provided in that section, in addition to any other similar remedies provided by law.

    (c) Fraudulent Copyright Notice.—Any person who, with fraudulent intent, places on any article a notice of copyright or words of the same purport that such person knows to be false, or who, with fraudulent intent, publicly distributes or imports for public distribution any article bearing such notice or words that such person knows to be false, shall be fined not more than $2,500.

    (d) Fraudulent Removal of Copyright Notice.—Any person who, with fraudulent intent, removes or alters any notice of copyright appearing on a copy of a copyrighted work shall be fined not more than $2,500.

    (e) False Representation.—Any person who knowingly makes a false representation of a material fact in the application for copyright registration provided for by section 409, or in any written statement filed in connection with the application, shall be fined not more than $2,500.

    (f) Rights of Attribution and Integrity.—Nothing in this section applies to infringement of the rights conferred by section 106A(a).

    (Pub. L. 94–553, title I, §101, Oct. 19, 1976, 90 Stat. 2586; Pub. L. 97–180, §5, May 24, 1982, 96 Stat. 93; Pub. L. 101–650, title VI, §606(b), Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5131; Pub. L. 105–147, §2(b), Dec. 16, 1997, 111 Stat. 2678; Pub. L. 109–9, title I, §103(a), Apr. 27, 2005, 119 Stat. 220; Pub. L. 110–403, title II, §201(a), Oct. 13, 2008, 122 Stat. 4260.)

    As with your quote from the FAQ, the entire section says:

    Is it legal to download works from peer-to-peer networks and if not, what is the penalty for doing so?

    Uploading or downloading works protected by copyright without the authority of the copyright owner is an infringement of the copyright owner’s exclusive rights of reproduction and/or distribution. Anyone found to have infringed a copyrighted work may be liable for statutory damages up to $30,000 for each work infringed and, if willful infringement is proven by the copyright owner, that amount may be increased up to $150,000 for each work infringed. In addition, an infringer of a work may also be liable for the attorney’s fees incurred by the copyright owner to enforce his or her rights.

    Whether or not a particular work is being made available under the authority of the copyright owner is a question of fact. But since any original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium (including a computer file) is protected by federal copyright law upon creation, in the absence of clear information to the contrary, most works may be assumed to be protected by federal copyright law.

    Since the files distributed over peer-to-peer networks are primarily copyrighted works, there is a risk of liability for downloading material from these networks. To avoid these risks, there are currently many “authorized” services on the Internet that allow consumers to purchase copyrighted works online, whether music, ebooks, or motion pictures. By purchasing works through authorized services, consumers can avoid the risks of infringement liability and can limit their exposure to other potential risks, e.g., viruses, unexpected material, or spyware.

    For more information on this issue, see the Register of Copyrights’ testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

    Statutory Damages are civil. Risk of liability for downloads means it isn’t certain. There are no criminal proceedings for downloading copyrighted media, it isn’t illegal.

    In fact, it’s actually even more lenient than I had expected, you STILL don’t qualify for criminal charges even if you cost the real copyright owner $999.99.



  • The article says

    Soon it became dangerous to download the movie, though, as popular demand for the movie quickly put a target on downloaders’ backs and scammers soon planted malware in Spider-Man movie torrents that ReasonLabs reported used the movie to “lure in as many victims as possible.”

    ReasonLabs said that the malware was “likely from a Russian torrenting site.” It took over the would-be Spider-Man movie watchers’ computers without setting off Windows Defender and with the goal of cryptomining in the background for the bad actors’ benefit.

    It could be that the article is misquoting people and displaying a Bias, but I wouldn’t know.












  • Right, let me fill you in, Tankies are people who support authoritarian regimes in Russia, China, North Korea, etc. They’re all over Lemmy. Sometimes they’re very forthright with their ideologies, other times they try to astroturf and pretend to subtly align with our ideals so that they can influence us to do the following: Harm Western World Powers, Dismantle Democracies, Empower China.

    The often use words like Bourgeois and Capitalists, speak of NATO as if it were militaristic imperialism, and oppose nonviolent political reforms of all types. They claim to support communism and/or socialism, but they absolutely will not promote any politicial path to implement those which do not involve overthrowing the state or without weakening “liberals”. Note that they do not mean a Liberal party, they mean the concept of liberalism.

    Primarily you find them on Lemmy ml, Hexbear, and lemmygrad but you will find them all over. They are here. And they hate you. They want your neighbors to get fed up and kill you or vice versa.

    avoid the tankies

    Or intentionally piss them off, either works




  • Land Contracts and Contracts for Deed aren’t considered mortgages so they lack tax incentives as well as legal protections for buyers and sellers, but yes I do agree that a long term contract beats a monthly rental agreement in terms of locking in a rate.

    Sometimes you can get trapped in a contract that would disqualify all your payments up to that point if it doesn’t have terms about cashing in your equity unless you pay the full amount due via selling to a third party or getting a bank loan with which you can repay via renting or selling your property like some sort of sick landlord carousel.

    I definitely don’t know if I would “recommend” this route for people who aren’t well-learned in matters of real estate, if they do go this route then I absolutely insist they have a trustworthy attorney act as intermediary for the transaction.

    Thank you for expanding this discussion.


  • In 2016 the four elections before super Tuesday. One had Bernie win New Hampshire with 60% for 15 delegates and Hillary 9 delegates, the other three went to Hillary with 49%, 52%, and 73% for a total of 82 to Bernie’s 50.

    After Super Tuesday where Hillary won 8 of the 11 states she had a lead 197 delegates and in the middle of march won another 8 out of 12 states for a lead of 320 delegates. In late march Bernie saw a small comeback of 7 state victory and the overseas democrats out of 9 contests.

    From April through June Hillary had won 14 contests out of 20, including Puerte Rico, DC, and Guam as well as 11 more states.

    At this point HRC had 16,914,722 votes and 2,842 delegates to Bernie Sander’s 13,206,428 votes and 1,820 delegates. It was a long, drawn out primary race with a very clear winner by millions of votes.

    So why do people keep spreading the lie that it was rigged? Because they don’t want Democrats to win. They want us to get mad at our own party and splinter into smaller factions.

    I think we should have listened to Bernie: and voted for Hillary Clinton.


  • Some townships and counties have strict regulations and housing authorities which make coops and communal housing difficult, rarely intentionally but often as a result of requiring liability and responsibility for repairs and outcomes.

    That said, there is a big push in a lot of cities such as Denver which is allowing more options.

    One thing to be wary about is that depending on the structure of the commune/cooperative it might be indistinguishable from an HOA or a Condo.