PinoyDVD: The Pinoy Digital Video & Devices Community
DVD Forum => General DVD Discussion => Topic started by: wrAth on Jan 04, 2006 at 03:33 PM
-
what about copyright issues?
-
It is not illegal as long as it is not being mass produced or sold for profit. There is a section of the law quoted to me by a lawyer, I just forgot which. Also, its written on the warning of DVDs that they should not be played in public places. These demo disks are for home use only so no violations there.
And in any case it is illegal, for these guys to go after us is like asking Microsoft to raid a small time 12 computer internet shop beside a college for pirated MS OS. Too puny and worthless for them.
-
ah.
i've been ingesting a lot of print on (digital) intellectual property rights protection lately which has made me curious about how the topic can be better understood by laypersons such as myself.
-
Di naman bawal mag-back-up ng Original mong dvd, as long as ikaw lang ang gagamit. Nabasa ko minsan sa internet na nanalo sa court yung pag-back-up ng movie for back-up purpose only. Kaya nga may license ang Nero at iba pang authoring program na kaya magduplicate ng disk in just one click. Dami din blank disk, na may mga licenses din to operate. As long as you dont sell it, and for own use, it is still legal...basta bumibili ka ng mga original, not P.
Fish tayo :D
-
copyright? has someone called your attention regarding this? ::)
No sir, but we know it's illegal to copy whole or any part of any copyrighted material.
Hindi naman siguro illegal kung small portion lang ang kinopya. But in case of prosecution, use these provisions as defenses:
-----------------------------------
Section 177. Copyright or Economic Rights. - Subject to the provisions of Chapter VIII, copyright or economic rights shall consist of the exclusive right to carry out, authorize or prevent the following acts:
177.1. Reproduction of the work or substantial portion of the work;
xxx
Section 185. Fair Use of a Copyrighted Work. - 185.1. The fair use of a copyrighted work for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, research, and similar purposes is not an infringement of copyright. Decompilation, which is understood here to be the reproduction of the code and translation of the forms of the computer program to achieve the inter-operability of an independently created computer program with other programs may also constitute fair use. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is fair use, the factors to be considered shall include:
(a) The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for non-profit educational purposes;
(b) The nature of the copyrighted work;
(c) The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(d) The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
xxx
Section 187. Reproduction of Published Work. - 187.1. Notwithstanding the provision of Section 177, and subject to the provisions of Subsection 187.2, the private reproduction of a published work in a single copy, where the reproduction is made by a natural person exclusively for research and private study, shall be permitted, without the authorization of the owner of copyright in the work.
(R.A. 8293, otherwise known as the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, emphasis supplied, http://www.chanrobles.com/legal7copyright.htm)
------------------------------------
Hindi ba the short clip cannot be considered a "substantial portion" of the whole?
At hindi ba the purpose of the use is not of a "commercial nature"?
At hindi ba the compilation of video clips is only for audio/video/electronics demonstration, and is therefore intended for "criticism, comment, ... teaching, ... research, and similar purposes"?
"FAIR USE" na siguro 'yan. However, lawyers cannot say for sure unless an actual case is decided by the Supreme Court.
-
Nabasa ko minsan sa internet na nanalo sa court yung pag-back-up ng movie for back-up purpose only.
Ang problema kasi, laws vary from country to country. A foreign judgment cannot be used as basis for interpretation of Philippine laws because foreign jurisprudence is not binding on the Philippines.
Kaya nga may license ang Nero at iba pang authoring program na kaya magduplicate ng disk in just one click. Dami din blank disk, na may mga licenses din to operate.
Ang problema, Nero and the blank disc were intended to be used for non-copyrighted material only.
-
how do foreign laws and treaties affect the enforcement of copyright protection laws over here?
i read recently about a guy in the states who wrote to seven major production outfits in the US, asking permission for him to use materials from movie-DVDs on a short film he's making, which he intends to show a private audience (if i remember right). out of the seven, only one gave their permission.
-
Ang problema kasi, laws vary from country to country. A foreign judgment cannot be used as basis for interpretation of Philippine laws because foreign jurisprudence is not binding on the Philippines.
in that case, what's the general or specific scope of Philippine laws pertaining to this matter? also, re the hundred of websites using film photos or DVD contents or artwork as banners or images, some of the pix are not licensed to be published online or in print? and yet, because of publicity values, studios are not apprehended. where do we draw the thin line between legitimate and illegitimate? from what benefits the studios or the private consumers?
Ang problema, Nero and the blank disc were intended to be used for non-copyrighted material only.
pardon my ignorance, are there visible labels or general warnings on the mentioned products? ala marlboro's warning so to speak.
8)
-
how do foreign laws and treaties affect the enforcement of copyright protection laws over here?
i read recently about a guy in the states who wrote to seven major production outfits in the US, asking permission for him to use materials from movie-DVDs on a short film he's making, which he intends to show a private audience (if i remember right). out of the seven, only one gave their permission.
for your first question, i think you're in a more appropo position to answer this. i have read somewhere that World Bank imposes additional policies to safeguard these intellectual rights... policies pertaining to taxes and other factors limiting economic liberty of the Philippines.
re the guy who wrote to the studios, there could be thousands of reasons why his proposal was declined... maybe the short film is off-equity, bad publicity, studios have existing contracts, etc. unless we have a complete perspective re this case, we would not be able to arrive at a theory.
8)
-
i was hoping too that the other members who got their demo discs will have a hand in participating in the discussion.
cheers!
8) ;D
-
Mga bro its useless to think and even consider the legal consequences of our project at this time, ang dami dami dyan gumagawa ng mas illegal kaysa sa atin and wala naman nakukulong(malamang si blu ray 1st LOL,joke lang bro). lets just do it muna saka na lang magsisi ;D
-
pardon my ignorance, are there visible labels or general warnings on the mentioned products? ala marlboro's warning so to speak.
Nero End-User Agreement
IX. Disclaimer
THE SOFTWARE IS DESIGNED TO ASSIST YOU IN REPRODUCING MATERIAL IN WHICH YOU OWN THE COPYRIGHT OR HAVE OBTAINED PERMISSION TO COPY FROM THE COPYRIGHT OWNER.
-
thanks for this wrath.
so are you insinuating that this effort is illegal? or illegal only if you use NERO? i want to know your thoughts.
8)
-
for your first question, i think you're in a more appropo position to answer this. i have read somewhere that World Bank imposes additional policies to safeguard these intellectual rights... policies pertaining to taxes and other factors limiting economic liberty of the Philippines.
indeed, but the World Bank's role is more of slapping our wrists should we continue to err, and giving us doggie biscuits if we behave ourselves. i was referring to the enforcement of the actual laws by local authorities. then again, copyright laws must be nearly identical across countries so for this purpose, i guess US intellectual property protection laws apply similarly in the Philippines.
re the guy who wrote to the studios, there could be thousands of reasons why his proposal was declined... maybe the short film is off-equity, bad publicity, studios have existing contracts, etc. unless we have a complete perspective re this case, we would not be able to arrive at a theory.
i believe the goal of the subject was to investigate the willingness of studios to share content, and not necessarily make a film. so he found out that studios aren't much willing to share at all, regardless of the scale of the undertaking.
-
thanks for this wrath.
so are you insinuating that this effort is illegal?
at best, as the form and substance of the discussion proves, it is questionable.
i think we are in an interesting quagmire here, and i personally am much interested in finding out on which court the ball lays on these kinds of things. international, particularly US, media nowadays is fraught with discussions of intellectual property, in light of the ever-expanding knowledge-economy, which is in one way or another part and parcel of the philosophies of tech heavyweights like Google, IBM, and Bill Gates.
I was particularly intrigued by an article of digital piracy on the "Issues 2006" Newsweek Special Edition which had the chin-scratching, hmmm-inducing byline: "When Louis Armstrong borrowed from his peers, the law smiled on him. So why does it look upon his successors as digital criminals?"
In the end, my curiosity centers on the eternal dilemma: Where to draw the line. (between legality and good intentions)
(note also that Google and Amazon.com also face issues of a similar nature, with their respective visionary projects Google Books and Amazon Pages)
or illegal only if you use NERO?
apparently, per the disclaimer in Ahead's EULA, the protection of intellectual property takes precedence, as should be the case with all reproduction software and hardware.
-
indeed, but the World Bank's role is more of slapping our wrists should we continue to err, and giving us doggie biscuits if we behave ourselves. i was referring to the enforcement of the actual laws by local authorities. then again, copyright laws must be nearly identical across countries so for this purpose, i guess US intellectual property protection laws apply similarly in the Philippines.
i think the answer is obvious. nope. even we, as collectors or end-users, are not properly educated re these rules and laws. but where is it written?
i believe the goal of the subject was to investigate the willingness of studios to share content, and not necessarily make a film. so he found out that studios aren't much willing to share at all, regardless of the scale of the undertaking.
of course, sharing contents is subject to agreed licenses and other policies mandated by the management. i dont believe we can limit and narrow the study to just willingness of studios to share content. the main objective would eventualy branch out and tap other factors leading to why sharing now becomes an impossibility. complexities and protocols. far from a simple ABC
also, we must not rule out the fact that studios assess every project on the basis of mutual benefits (ideally) in terms of business (profit) or general perception (PR-image). in reality and it has become a benevolent practice, scale of the undertaking or the person/studio applying for permission matters. big time.
8)
-
i think the answer is obvious. nope. even we, as collectors or end-users, are not even properly educated re these rules and laws. but where is it written?
of course, sharing contents is subject to agreed licenses and other policies mandated by the management. i dont believe we can limit and narrow the study to just willingness of studios to share content. the main objective would eventualy branch out and tap other factors why sharing becomes impossibility. complexities and protocols.
also, we must not rule out the fact that studios assess every project on the basis of mutual benefits (ideally) in terms of business (profit) or general perception (PR-image). in reality and it has become a benevolent practice, scale of the undertaking or the person/studio applying for permission matters. big time.
8)
Excellent observations, Sir. 8)
-
ah.
i've been ingesting a lot of print on (digital) intellectual property rights protection lately which has made me curious about how the topic can be better understood by laypersons such as myself.
so this is what you call a layperson's discussion? ;D ;D ;D
medyo di ko naintindihan kalahati ng sinabi mo that i have to look for a dictionary and surf the web.
hahahahahahaha!
----------
wrath, i have high regard in your wit and intelligence... and your opinion greatly matters. hope someone can give answers to issues raised.
8) ;D ;D
-
hope someone can give answers to issues raised.
8) ;D ;D
WANTED: legal luminary :D
-
death list five:
- not for profit
- less than or equal to only 5% of the whole content (film, documentary, artwork)
- disclaimer or masthead containing the intent of the effort/finished product (personal copy/ responsibilities)
- full acknowledgment/details of source (copyright, where-to-buy, date of release)
- original source being legally acquired
of course, playing at no legal stuff. just plain wisdom and opinion.
8)
-
Nero End-User Agreement
IX. Disclaimer
THE SOFTWARE IS DESIGNED TO ASSIST YOU IN REPRODUCING MATERIAL IN WHICH YOU OWN THE COPYRIGHT OR HAVE OBTAINED PERMISSION TO COPY FROM THE COPYRIGHT OWNER.
Does it mean the whole material or even a portion of it? Coz ive seen AVPs of multinational companies using clips from famous movies for product lunches,victory parties etc ...o baka Roxio gamit :)
-
well to give my 2-cent point of view, what have been done is reproducing and distribution of copyright materials (even if what was copied is only a part of several films). please note that whenever you watch your original DVDs there is always a reminder and what is included there is something like "reproducing this or part of this material is illegal" (or something like that).
just to give a better picture, there is no difference between stealing 500 million pesos and stealing 500 pesos both are still crimes.
As for the Disclaimer of Nero Paragraph IX - it means that the data (movie in this instance) should be copyrighted by you in order for you to reproduce the same if it is not copyrighted to you then you should seek permission from the copyright owner (in this case, the movie companies).
hope, i have given a clear view on this. i am not a lawyer but a law student.
thanks.
-
just to give a better picture, there is no difference between stealing 500 million pesos and stealing 500 pesos both are still crimes.
hope, i have given a clear view on this. i am not a lawyer but a law student.
thanks.
So the moral of the story is to steal the 500 million? ;D sorry bro just a joke.How can you explain the rampant use of pirated materials and copy protected materials in appliance stores for demo use? I dont think its a crime to make a compilation of movies or music for personal use and enjoyment. :) believe me im not for piracy bro.
-
I dont think its a crime too, heck if its a crime, why is there a similar 3 disk project in the U.S. made through some forum (AVS?)members? Its for private use, for crying out loud.
Their copyright laws are more strict (& stricly enforced) than ours and I am sure they will be very cautious before doing a project like this. They dont get a slap in the wrist penalties (like we do here) for such violations there in the U.S. You cant bribe your way out of it either.
-
i think the laxity of law enforcement across the board has diluted humanity's concept of what is wrong and what is not wrong.
existentially, what is "wrong" is never defined by what has or has not happened in the past. nor is it defined by being or not being caught red-handed. the value of jurisprudence is founded on the sound reasoning on which it is based. precedence is merely a convenient transmission mechanism for reason.
plus, ethically, rationalizing actions with the philosophy of "everybody is doing it, so why can't I?" is anything but astute.
but this is already OT isn't it.
-
i think this is already OT but....
the copyright law in the USA varies from state to state, there are states which allows one person to have a back-up copy (for personal use) of an original CD/DVD which the person legally acquired while others does not. In the philippines the copyright law DOES NOT allow a back-up copy to be made but what the heck no one is really apprehending the pirates right? no one has gone to jail right?
but the questions that we as members of PinoyDVD should answer right now are
1. Do we go down to the level of the pirates?
2. Do we toe the thin line between "personal use" and "distribution"?
Law is actually arguing different points and different perspective, there is also the part where laws can be bent without breaking it. For this instance, we will delete this thread already, there is no more evidence that there was a compilation of parts of movies that came from original copies of different people.
I would also like to answer the query earlier whether we can use the laws of other countries - well what we can use is the decisions made from foreign countries on cases that our country does not have any landmark cases yet. For the IPR, there has not been a case that has been properly decided here, so I firmly believe we will use the USA cases as our model cases.
Again, the Philippines has a lot of good LAWS, LAWS for everything, but the problem is the implementation, the Philippines does not have the political will to implement its laws.
I am not saying that those who involved in the making of the demo-disc are pirates or something to that effect, i am just airing my legal opinion on the matter (on a personal note, i would love to have a copy of the demo discs, nakakapaglaway talaga!!!)
I remain.
-
the copyright law in the USA varies from state to state, there are states which allows one person to have a back-up copy (for personal use) of an original CD/DVD which the person legally acquired while others does not. In the philippines the copyright law DOES NOT allow a back-up copy to be made but what the heck no one is really apprehending the pirates right? no one has gone to jail right?
You have said yourself that the Philippines does not have a model nor clear-cut guidelines regarding IPR, and that we use the U.S. laws as a model... So how come back-up copies for personal use are allowed in the States and NOT in the Philippines? Do we have a SPECIFIC law/memorandum/executive order which says that creating back-up copy for private and personal use is illegal?
-
i still remain and believe that part of the dvd can still be copied for purposes limited to home viewing and other non-profit initiatives be it educational or merely a compilation.
what's the point of buying all original and magnificent dvds, not to mention expensive, if you are not given at least this right or freedom to compile scenes that would suit your taste or purpose?
i will always remember the old CD's warning or disclaimer stating: All rights of the recording company and the owner of the recorded work reserved. cant find it on any dvd though.
8)
-
Does it mean the whole material or even a portion of it? Coz ive seen AVPs of multinational companies using clips from famous movies for product lunches,victory parties etc ...o baka Roxio gamit :)
yeah that!
8)
-
well to give my 2-cent point of view, what have been done is reproducing and distribution of copyright materials (even if what was copied is only a part of several films). please note that whenever you watch your original DVDs there is always a reminder and what is included there is something like "reproducing this or part of this material is illegal" (or something like that).
another point.. prob is others can see the alleged irresponsibilities of other collectors but refuse to see the loopholes and manipulations orchestrated by DVD studios or manufacturers.
for example, to whom are we going to address these permissions? for a number of cd's of broadway musicals, a clear address and contact details were printed on liner notes should you wish to inquire or use any content or part of the art. in that way, interested parties are aided and given a 360-reminder of rights/laws.
how come international or US laws have not mandated (for integration) this important detail?
-
well to give my 2-cent point of view, what have been done is reproducing and distribution of copyright materials (even if what was copied is only a part of several films). please note that whenever you watch your original DVDs there is always a reminder and what is included there is something like "reproducing this or part of this material is illegal" (or something like that).
Copying an insubstantial portion of a work is valid Fair Use under R.A. 8293, otherwise known as the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines.
If there is no law declaring such an act illegal, then the same cannot be made illegal simply because the copyright owner said so in his self-serving anti-piracy warning. Hence, the legal maxim: Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege (There is no crime where there is no law punishing it).
just to give a better picture, there is no difference between stealing 500 million pesos and stealing 500 pesos both are still crimes.
It's true that stealing P500 and stealing P500M are both crimes. Despite the relatively small value of P500, stealing that amount is punishable because it was made punishable by the Revised Penal Code.
However, copying an insubstantial portion of a DVD video is not punishable because there is no law that punishes an act of "Fair Use".
-
whew!!! medyo umiinit na dito ah ;D......this is a very good topic for discussion simply because our jurisprudence are not that abundant on the matter of IPR (intellectual property rights), more particularly on audio/video piracy. am not even aware of any decided case on this particular issue, not yet anyway. kaya masarap magkuro-kuro since the supreme court, which has the final say on what is legal and what is not under our legal system, has not yet spoken on this particular issue.
personally, i am inclined to share the view of barrister that there was nothing illegal in what The Dirty Dozen (referring to the lucky 12 members who are now in possession of this Ultimate Demo Disc ;D) have done.
it is quiet clear from the quoted provisions of the pertinent law (Rep. Act No. 8293) that the exclusivity of the copyright owner does not cover the reproduction of very small portions of his copyrighted materials. and this is especially true if the purpose of the reproduction would constitute as a "fair use" of the copyrighted material, as these words are understood therein.
let us not lose sight of the fact that after buying these original DVDs/CDs, we become as owners thereof whose rights are also protected under our laws. one inherent right as owners is to USE it as we see fit to our personal gratification, subject only to some existing laws such as RA 8293. copying film clips from different DVDs that you own, w/c consist of very small portions thereof, and making a demo disc out of those clips for the owners' exclusive and personal use and gratification would (in my humble legal opinion) certainly constitute as a "fair use" of these copyrighted DVDs.
in the matter of the applicability of foreign jurisprudence, they are not legally binding on our courts as already opined by the other posters. they may have some persuasive effect especially since our own jurisprudence on the matter are not that rich to consult with, as i have mentioned at the outset. but they remain merely as recommendatory that our courts may or may not consider at all.
just my two cents. 8)
Section 177. Copyright or Economic Rights. - Subject to the provisions of Chapter VIII, copyright or economic rights shall consist of the exclusive right to carry out, authorize or prevent the following acts:
177.1. Reproduction of the work or substantial portion of the work;
xxx
Section 185. Fair Use of a Copyrighted Work. - 185.1. The fair use of a copyrighted work for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, research, and similar purposes is not an infringement of copyright. Decompilation, which is understood here to be the reproduction of the code and translation of the forms of the computer program to achieve the inter-operability of an independently created computer program with other programs may also constitute fair use. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is fair use, the factors to be considered shall include:
(a) The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for non-profit educational purposes;
(b) The nature of the copyrighted work;
(c) The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(d) The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
xxx
Section 187. Reproduction of Published Work. - 187.1. Notwithstanding the provision of Section 177, and subject to the provisions of Subsection 187.2, the private reproduction of a published work in a single copy, where the reproduction is made by a natural person exclusively for research and private study, shall be permitted, without the authorization of the owner of copyright in the work.
(R.A. 8293, otherwise known as the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, emphasis supplied, http://www.chanrobles.com/legal7copyright.htm)
------------------------------------
Hindi ba the short clip cannot be considered a "substantial portion" of the whole?
At hindi ba the purpose of the use is not of a "commercial nature"?
At hindi ba the compilation of video clips is only for audio/video/electronics demonstration, and is therefore intended for "criticism, comment, ... teaching, ... research, and similar purposes"?
"FAIR USE" na siguro 'yan. However, lawyers cannot say for sure unless an actual case is decided by the Supreme Court.
-
Hala DIRTY DOZEN na kami ;) , last time, i think we were just 12 LUCKY INDIVIDUALS lol. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
If copying/ duplicating/ reproducing any copyrighted materials like dvd movies/cd music to be used as back-up material only for personal use as claimed(but was lent to friends and family) is a crime,then i guess most of us can be accused of having committed a crime? ??? ??? ??? buti na lang hindi ako marunong mag back-up ng collections ko ;D ;D ;D
-
No one on his right mind will prosecute this case (if this is a case in the first place). Two words for all the scarecrows>Greenhills-Quiapo.
Peace.
-
Hala DIRTY DOZEN na kami ;) , last time, i think we were just 12 LUCKY INDIVIDUALS lol. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
If copying/ duplicating/ reproducing any copyrighted materials like dvd movies/cd music to be used as back-up material only for personal use as claimed(but was lent to friends and family) is a crime,then i guess most of us can be accused of having committed a crime? ??? ??? ??? buti na lang hindi ako marunong mag back-up ng collections ko ;D ;D ;D
Wala huhuli sa atin. Copyright? kaekekan lang (joke lang poe).
-
I cannot promise Part two due to the following reasons:
xxx
5. Copyright issue
xxx
copyright? has someone called your attention regarding this?
No sir, but we know it's illegal to copy whole or any part of any copyrighted material. xxx
--------------------------------
Wala huhuli sa atin. Copyright? kaekekan lang (joke lang poe).
Hmmm ...
Parang mas kampante na ngayon si sir Blu-Ray... Papayag na kaya siyang gumawa ng Part II? ;D ;D ;D
-
i think the laxity of law enforcement across the board has diluted humanity's concept of what is wrong and what is not wrong.
existentially, what is "wrong" is never defined by what has or has not happened in the past. nor is it defined by being or not being caught red-handed. the value of jurisprudence is founded on the sound reasoning on which it is based. precedence is merely a convenient transmission mechanism for reason.
plus, ethically, rationalizing actions with the philosophy of "everybody is doing it, so why can't I?" is anything but astute.
but this is already OT isn't it.
It sure is OT bro :)! We were discussing about the LEGAL aspect of the matter so I answered in regards to the legality. What you are saying above is the MORAL aspect which is a different issue & definitely not really the topic for my reply. And if I answer again in terms of morality, WHY BOTHER? there will always be something to pick on to prolong these arguments, it will never end. ;D
And if you read my replies in the thread from the start, you can see that I have expressed my disbelief in the illegality of this activity many times. And I see nothing wrong or illegal in compiling a DVD collection for home use. Why zero in on just 1 reply then shift & preach some righteous speech on the morality aspect? :)
On Oct 31 you posted in the thread where this demo disk all began:
And after your post here was a good 2 months of this compilation where you could have questioned or objected to the so called "morality" of this project. But I dont think you did. Why only now? Were you not sure? Did you have to wait for other people to open up the topic so you could join in & pounce on this MORAL aspect of things in a safer environment? :-*
What makes this matter right or wrong is a matter of personal opinion which constitues "the value of jurisprudence w/c is founded on the sound reasoning on which it is based". If you think that what the 12 members did was wrong in your sound reasoning, then I respect your opinion. But frankly, it doesnt matter at all to me. As long as my sound reasoning says there is nothin wrong, then why be a slave to what other people think? ???
But I agree with your first statement.
So for those who have ever:
backed up a DVD for private use,
or have bought a single pirated DVD, playstation , PC game, audio CD
or downloaded and use MP3 music ,
copied a music CD or
taped a song from the radio (during our younger years)
in this country of ours should just ...
shut up and not be a part of this Morality discussion,
you are a morally unfit & unrighteous to even press the reply or quote button. ;D
Peace ;)
At least I will be honest enough to admit I am guilty of almost all of the above... so I will be the first to shut up and not be the one to "cast the first stone"
-
It sure is OT bro :)! We were discussing about the LEGAL aspect of the matter so I answered in regards to the legality. What you are saying above is the MORAL aspect which is a different issue & definitely not really the topic for my reply. And if I answer again in terms of morality, WHY BOTHER? there will always be something to pick on to prolong these arguments, it will never end. ;D
And if you read my replies in the thread from the start, you can see that I have expressed my disbelief in the illegality of this activity many times. And I see nothing wrong or illegal in compiling a DVD collection for home use. Why zero in on just 1 reply then shift & preach some righteous speech on the morality aspect? :)
On Oct 31 you posted this in the thread where this demo disk all began:And after your post here was a good 2 months of this compilation where you could have questioned or objected to the so called "morality" of this project. But I dont think you did. Why only now? Were you not sure? Did you have to wait for other people to open up the topic so you could join in & pounce on this MORAL aspect of things in a safer environment? :-*
What makes this matter right or wrong is a matter of personal opinion which constitues "the value of jurisprudence w/c is founded on the sound reasoning on which it is based". If you think that what the 12 members did was wrong in your sound reasoning, then I respect your opinion. But frankly, it doesnt matter at all to me. As long as my sound reasoning says there is nothin wrong, then why be a slave to what other people think? ???
Let me give you an example of varying opinions: If I bought 20 pcs R1 Incredibles as Xmas gifts to kids & my friends Some guy who wasnt able to buy 1 resents & blames me for that and thinks I am a JERK for doing that. But I am not a jerk to the many kids & friends who got this gift. If this same guy sends me a PM to sell him a copy of the DVD and I politely decline & he still resents me ( or harbours some secretly) for it, at least the kids & friends are still happy. What I have done was right in my sound reasoning but wrong to the that 1 guy who in my opinion has questionable reasoning. Whose opinion should I value? ;)
But I agree with your first statement.
So for those who have ever:
backed up a DVD for private use,
or have bought a single pirated DVD, playstation , PC game, audio CD
or downloaded and use MP3 music ,
copied a music CD or
taped a song from the radio (during our younger years)
in this country of ours should just ...
shut up and not be a part of this Morality discussion,
you are a morally unfit & unrighteous to even press the reply or quote button. ;D
Peace ;)
At least I will be honest enough to admit I am guilty of almost all of the above... so I will be the first to shut up and not be the one to "cast the first stone"
ouch. sorry if i hurt anyone. guess it got out of hand. i have no problem with the Incredibles thing, man. honest to goodness!
but please note that when i posted DOWNFALL, the topic of the discussion was "Best DVD to test your surrounds?". as to the timing of my questioning, i reacted only when a separate thread for a custom-made DVD arose. this is beacuse i felt the discussion was toeing the line of tolerance which pinoydvd has for "controversial" topics. as for the morality discussion, that is solely my bad. it would probably be more appropriate in the big talk thread.
peace!
-
MAtZTER, i think quoting the message posted by wrath months ago is completely out of the topic. though we share similar points, i believe we should learn not to quote previous posts on different threads as the previous postings may be in different perspective.
pero just in case i need 1 R1 incredibles, let me know kanino sa mga inaanak mo kukuha. ;D
-------
for the longest time and the primary reason i did not participate in the first undertaking is because i do not personally know the organizers and of course the fear of doing something illegal. wrath, you have made the right decision to post question in this thread which otherwise would have limited the discussion to who's gonna manage and supervise the next big transfer for the next platinum demo disc?... which until now, unfortunately, knows no answer.
big help!
weird though that among the 12 lucky people or dirty dozen (as quoted from classicman's post), not even half participated substantially in the discussion. im quite disappointed in that regard.
8)
-
MAtZTER, i think quoting the message posted by wrath months ago is completely out of the topic. though we share similar points, i believe we should learn not to quote previous posts on different threads as the previous postings may be in different perspective.
pero just in case i need 1 R1 incredibles, let me know kanino sa mga inaanak mo kukuha.
weird though that among the 12 lucky people or dirty dozen (as quoted from classicman's post), not even half participated substantially in the discussion. im quite disappointed in that regard.
8)
Redge ako yung biggest inaanak ;D and im not giving it away bro. ;D ;D ;D
Maybe the rest of the participants are still busy enjoying their demo disc ;D ;D ;D
ouch. sorry if i hurt anyone. guess it got out of hand. i have no problem with the Incredibles thing, man. honest to goodness!
peace!
No harm done here bro,esp when i know that the project has no morality issues involve whatsoever :D Maybe next time it would be better if you could refrain from using terms such as "has dilluted humanity's concept of what is wrong and what is not wrong"medyo masakit basahin e lalo na kung simpleng demo disc lang ang involve :P have a nice day guys ;D ;D ;D
-
No harm done here bro,esp when i know that the project has no morality issues involve whatsoever :D Maybe next time it would be better if you could refrain from using terms such as "has dilluted humanity's concept of what is wrong and what is not wrong"medyo masakit basahin e lalo na kung simpleng demo disc lang ang involve :P have a nice day guys ;D ;D ;D
my bad!
i let my posts veer away from my true intent: determining whether the discussions for which this thread was started might or might not merit sanctions from the mods. that's pretty much it. kaya lang, the issue is a such a full-blooded derivative of real-world occurences, that it was quite difficult to limit the discussion to the world of the forum. plus, concerning legal issues with little precedent to go on, coupled with ambiguous legislation, we have little recourse but to examine laws in their primacy.
-
I would like to apologize for my post :-[, peace man :-*, I should have slept first before I typed away. Anyone can observe from my 1000 previous posts that I have never ever reacted this way to anyone. My posts were always joking (600 of the posts) or trying to give some advice. But for the first time, I just felt so provoked by the timing & nature of the reply. Apology accepted, and please accept mine as well ;D.
Sir Hemi, I agree, my bad. LOL, I was supposed to log in early to modify & delete this part but it was too late I guess. Anyway, Pchin told me he invited you over to our place, just come on over & I hope to meet you soon. I will show the demo disk to ya :).
-
I'm one of those dirty dozens and I have not participated at all since I have not visited this thread since the start of the year until now. Now that I did, it seems all the discussants on the side of of the dirty dozens are doing just fine, ;) And since, I'm no lawyer, (just a wanabee ;D), I leave it to the more legally trained to settle this.
Frankly, I think the effort of Blu-Ray should be compensated by the studios. Because of his compilation, I bought Flight of the Phoenix, Stealth and Kung Fu Hustle - titles I would never have bought had I not seen the compilation. ;D Now that's more OT. ;D
Just some thoughts here. Copyrighting laws I believe are predicated on protecting the owner of the material from not getting his dues when such materials are used for commercial gain. I think that's the spirit of the pertinent laws. And nothing the dirty dozen did violated that spirit. The compilation DVDs were never sold. I may have objected to Blu-Ray if he did this project for commercial gain. If I recall right, he was in fact the first to raise this issue in the orginating thread. But that's just my observation. ;D
-
Frankly, I think the effort of Blu-Ray should be compensated by the studios. Because of his compilation, I bought Flight of the Phoenix, Stealth and Kung Fu Hustle - titles I would never have bought had I not seen the compilation. ;D Now that's more OT. ;D
Hindi OT 'yan, bosing. (No joke, I'm dead serious.)
It's actually right on topic because the effect of Blu-Ray's use of the orig DVDs on the potential market for the said DVDs or on the value thereof is one of the criteria used by R.A. 8293 (Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines) in determining whether or not Blu-Ray's acts can be considered "fair use" of copyrighted work.
R.A. 8293 states:
"185.1. xxx In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is fair use, the factors to be considered shall include:
(a) The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for non-profit education purposes;
(b) The nature of the copyrighted work;
(c) The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(d) The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work." (Emphasis supplied)
If you were encouraged to buy the above-mentioned original DVDs because of Blu-Ray's compilation, then it is clear that the said compilation had the effect of increasing "the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work". Thus, your testimony helps establish the presence of Sec. 185.1 (d) as a factor in concluding that Blu-Ray's compilation project was indeed an act of "fair use" under the law.
Bos av_phile1 thinks like a lawyer. Maybe you should take up law because I suspect that you're a real natural. Now that's OT. ;D ;D ;D
-
MAtZTER, i think quoting the message posted by wrath months ago is completely out of the topic. though we share similar points, i believe we should learn not to quote previous posts on different threads as the previous postings may be in different perspective.
pero just in case i need 1 R1 incredibles, let me know kanino sa mga inaanak mo kukuha. ;D
-------
for the longest time and the primary reason i did not participate in the first undertaking is because i do not personally know the organizers and of course the fear of doing something illegal. wrath, you have made the right decision to post question in this thread which otherwise would have limited the discussion to who's gonna manage and supervise the next big transfer for the next platinum demo disc?... which until now, unfortunately, knows no answer.
big help!
weird though that among the 12 lucky people or dirty dozen (as quoted from classicman's post), not even half participated substantially in the discussion. im quite disappointed in that regard.
8)
redge...its becuase we are busy watching the demo disc ;D...cant get enough of it ;D
-
redge...its becuase we are busy watching the demo disc ;D...cant get enough of it ;D
ganun ba? next time kita tayo sa walkway.. pahiram ha. hehehehehehe.
;D ;D ;D
-
Bos av_phile1 thinks like a lawyer. Maybe you should take up law because I suspect that you're a real natural. Now that's OT. ;D ;D ;D
Well, just to respond to an OT, Thank you Barrister, I wish I could but I'm too old to get into another career. ;D
-
This is a very good point, however we forgot the legal maxim "NOSCITUR A SOCIIS"
Section 185. Fair Use of a Copyrighted Work. - 185.1. The fair use of a copyrighted work for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, research, and similar purposes is not an infringement of copyright.
(c) The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
There is not a hint of indication that "use for home theater testing" is included in the terms clearly indicated.. I am guessing that the reason "home theater testing" was likened to the term research, but a deeper look at the law, it means pertains to research that is for education. The term "portion" should also be properly defined. Is it a minute of the movie? Is it a chapter?
Legal luminaries can argue about this for a long time, mine is just my personal legal opinion and not my personal opinion for I myself, would like to have a demo disc. :P
I remain.
Section 177. Copyright or Economic Rights. - Subject to the provisions of Chapter VIII, copyright or economic rights shall consist of the exclusive right to carry out, authorize or prevent the following acts:
177.1. Reproduction of the work or substantial portion of the work;
xxx
Section 185. Fair Use of a Copyrighted Work. - 185.1. The fair use of a copyrighted work for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, research, and similar purposes is not an infringement of copyright. Decompilation, which is understood here to be the reproduction of the code and translation of the forms of the computer program to achieve the inter-operability of an independently created computer program with other programs may also constitute fair use. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is fair use, the factors to be considered shall include:
(a) The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for non-profit educational purposes;
(b) The nature of the copyrighted work;
(c) The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(d) The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
xxx
Section 187. Reproduction of Published Work. - 187.1. Notwithstanding the provision of Section 177, and subject to the provisions of Subsection 187.2, the private reproduction of a published work in a single copy, where the reproduction is made by a natural person exclusively for research and private study, shall be permitted, without the authorization of the owner of copyright in the work.
(R.A. 8293, otherwise known as the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, emphasis supplied, http://www.chanrobles.com/legal7copyright.htm)
------------------------------------
Hindi ba the short clip cannot be considered a "substantial portion" of the whole?
At hindi ba the purpose of the use is not of a "commercial nature"?
At hindi ba the compilation of video clips is only for audio/video/electronics demonstration, and is therefore intended for "criticism, comment, ... teaching, ... research, and similar purposes"?
"FAIR USE" na siguro 'yan. However, lawyers cannot say for sure unless an actual case is decided by the Supreme Court.