Legalities

[johnistpropaganda]

Ok. Just for ish 'n' giggles, suppose one installs Hoary on a PC. He/she wants to listen to their legally bought (and expensive) CD's onto their hard drive in the form of mp3's. This person also wants to occasionally watch DVD's, and maybe even convert a few to avi to store on the drive. Of couse, one would also like to view/listen to media on the net in the form of avi's. mov, mp3's, etc. So he goes ahead and installs the necesary codecs.

Question: If worse came to worse, what kind of legal reprocutions could you face?

These are things that %99.9 percent of us do and take for granted, everyday. As Ubuntu grow in popularity, this could be an issue we begin to face, especially in the US. I'm thinkin maybe we should take stock now.

Facts, figures, thoughts, anybody? it would be kinda cool/unsettling to get a sum total of the fines/jail time we could face resulting from the above scenario.

-jp-
www.itsyourcall.blogspot.com (http://www.itsyourcall.blogspot.com)

[KiwiNZ]

You will need to check the appropriate statutes in your own Country and the legal sanctions possible for breaching those statutes including civil sanctions.

[agger]

You will need to check the appropriate statutes in your own Country and the legal sanctions possible for breaching those statutes including civil sanctions.
Here in Denmark, these things are legal. So you'd
not face any repercussions.

Then there's the MP3 licensing question. I think that would
be civil (not penal) law, and I also think the MP3 consortium
would never go after individual end users for their patent
licenses.

I think in most countries outside the US there would be no legal
repercussions whatsoever.

[Brunellus]

Standard disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV. However, in the US, I understand that:

There are two issues here: the legality of making copies, and the legality of using each codec.

As far as copies of media you already own, this is 'fair use' under the copyright law, provided you do not then redistribute those copies.

The thornier issue is the codecs. Strictly speaking, any use of the codecs not specifically permitted in their end-user licence agreements is prohibited. (the enforceability of the same is a separate question...)

I rip all my own CDs to .ogg--not just because it's free, but because it's better.

[poofyhairguy]

Ok. Just for ish 'n' giggles, suppose one installs Hoary on a PC. He/she wants to listen to their legally bought (and expensive) CD's onto their hard drive in the form of mp3's. This person also wants to occasionally watch DVD's, and maybe even convert a few to avi to store on the drive. Of couse, one would also like to view/listen to media on the net in the form of avi's. mov, mp3's, etc. So he goes ahead and installs the necesary codecs.

Question: If worse came to worse, what kind of legal reprocutions could you face?

These are things that %99.9 percent of us do and take for granted, everyday. As Ubuntu grow in popularity, this could be an issue we begin to face, especially in the US. I'm thinkin maybe we should take stock now.

Facts, figures, thoughts, anybody? it would be kinda cool/unsettling to get a sum total of the fines/jail time we could face resulting from the above scenario.

-jp-
www.itsyourcall.blogspot.com (http://www.itsyourcall.blogspot.com)

For Mp3's nothing....you only get in trouble for distributing that, personal use is fine. For DVD stuff, in the USA the same penalty as breaking the DMCA-


Number of days DMCA arrestee Dmitry Sklyarov spent in jail: 13

http://anti-dmca.org/dmca-index.html

[KiwiNZ]

I think in most countries outside the US there would be no legal
repercussions whatsoever.

I dont think I would agree with this . In a majority it would not be illegal

[johnistpropaganda]

From http://anti-dmca.org/dmca-index.html

Maximum penalty for reading "Alice in Wonderland" aloud (possible DMCA violation): 5 years jail

Maximum penalty for having a "pirate" copy of "Planet of the Apes": 10 years jail/$2M fine

Average sentence for commiting Rape: 5 years


And i used to worry about getting caught smoking pot!

I'm in the process of moving, and don't know when i'll have time enough to do my own searching. in the mean time keep it going, guys! obviously, this is something that affects us all.

thanks
-jp-

[johnistpropaganda]

[QUOTE]For Mp3's nothing....you only get in trouble for distributing that, personal use is fine

Hmm, i thought, due to the proprietary nature of the mp3, use of the lame encoder was illegal. isn't that why it's not included with the ubuntu base install?

[TristanMike]

From http://anti-dmca.org/dmca-index.html

Maximum penalty for reading "Alice in Wonderland" aloud (possible DMCA violation): 5 years jail

Maximum penalty for having a "pirate" copy of "Planet of the Apes": 10 years jail/$2M fine

Average sentence for commiting Rape: 5 years


And i used to worry about getting caught smoking pot! All kidding aside, aren't those facts just ABSOLUTELY FRIGHTENING? When in our culture stealing a song is delt with MORE punishment then RAPE or CHILD ABUSE!!!!!!!! Here in Canada, a couple got just 8 months for 10 years of abuse and torture to two children(thier two nephews). I just keep thinking of Lenoard Cohen's song "The Future"

[drizek]

All kidding aside, aren't those facts just ABSOLUTELY FRIGHTENING? When in our culture stealing a song is delt with MORE punishment then RAPE or CHILD ABUSE!!!!!!!! Here in Canada, a couple got just 8 months for 10 years of abuse and torture to two children(thier two nephews). I just keep thinking of Lenoard Cohen's song "The Future"
its illegal, but i dont think anyone will come after you or ubuntu. and because youve already paid for windows(at one point), you have paid the mp3 people money, and when you bought your dvd player, it probably came with an mpeg2 decoder(for windows). dont worry about it, they have your money already.

[TristanMike]

its illegal, but i dont think anyone will come after you or ubuntu.Ubuntu, no(well, most likely no). Me, yes, depends on how much I steal ;-) . For instance, the MPAA and RIAA, to a lesser extent have, of late, made quite a few examples out of the torrent community and continue to strive to eliminate file sharing. I'm not trying to trivialize theft, especially on a massive scale, but by no means should theft ever come close to, or exceed the punishment for heinous crimes such as rape and abuse (unless of course the theft involves treason, then different laws might apply). It isn't just theft either, like johnistpropaganda's little joke about Pot. You can get more time for smoking a joint then for raping a woman. There is something unbalanced there, that's all.
and because youve already paid for windows(at one point), you have paid the mp3 people money, :? Well, I don't own an mp3 player of any sort. I have a tape walkman, and a tape deck in the car, and my shelf system doesn't play mp3's and neither does my PS2 or Gamecube. And.....ummmm....I kinda never really ever "paid" for windows, so to speak, I mean, I've used it, and there might have been some money involve, no wait, I've said too much. :-#
and when you bought your dvd player, it probably came with an mpeg2 decoder(for windows). dont worry about it, they have your money already.I don't own a dvd player actually. Well, that's a lie, I have a PS2, so Sony got my money, and that's ok with me. :razz:

[egon spengler]

All kidding aside, aren't those facts just ABSOLUTELY FRIGHTENING? When in our culture stealing a song is delt with MORE punishment then RAPE or CHILD ABUSE!!!!!!!! Here in Canada, a couple got just 8 months for 10 years of abuse and torture to two children(thier two nephews). I just keep thinking of Lenoard Cohen's song "The Future"

To keep it in perspective bear in mind that the comparison is between the maximum sentence vs. the average sentence. I'd be very surprised to find that anyone has ever been arrested for reading Alice in Wonderland aloud much less successfully convicted and sentenced to 5 years

[TristanMike]

You want to talk about perspectives, and maximum vs. average.
Think about this -- the average rape sentence isn't even half of the average drug possession sentence (www.aclu.org). That's assuming it's even brought to trial.
I'm sorry if I'm getting too opinonated but I get very upset when heinous crimes get minimal sentencing.

[xequence]

Ive never heard of an mp3 encoder being illegal. Ripping CD's is legal unless you distribute them. Ripping DVDs is illegal because you bypass copyright protection.

[TristanMike]

You know something I've never understood is that if it is legal to copy, rip, backup your own things, then why is there copy protection implemented in the products in the first place?

[wmcbrine]

In the U.S., at least, the end user is not really in violation in most (?) cases, since those things are covered by fair use. It's the programmers and distributors of the codecs, players, etc. who would potentially be prosecuted. Thus, you can have the right to do something, even while you can't legally be provided with the tools to do it. IANAL, YMMV.

Copy "protection" (= restriction) technology does not exist to enforce the law. You can have the right to copy something, but the manufacturer can still have the right to try to stop you from doing it. And prior to the DMCA, that's all they had. Copy restriction was a battle of wits between the restrictors and the crackers. People could be prosecuted for distributing cracked copies (a simple, classical copyright violation), but not for the act of cracking per se.

There's what's legal, and there's what they want you to do (or not do). Sadly, the DMCA narrows the gap. You say you'd like to make backups; they tell you to buy a new copy if the first one gets scratched.

[lerrup]

Okay,

I can't speak about the situation in other countries with any claims to accuracy, but you should think about whether it is a criminal or civil legal problem.

Using mp3 codecs without a licence is not likely to be a criminal act (not in England anyway) but would be an infringement of the licence holders rights. This would be a civil action and you would therefore pay them damages. As an end user this would be the cost of the licence you didn't buy; in other words a few quid. therefore, they are unlikely to come after endusers but would happily chase a distributor, such as Canonical.

Copyright infringements are likely to be civil as well, which is why the British Phonographic Institute (the BPI) sued file sharers for damages and didn't press for convictions of some sort. Basically, while it is possible to do so if you can show that it was being done in the course of business or other malice they haven't tried to show it yet.

However, getting around copy protection mechanisms is possibly a criminal offence in the UK and in other jurisdictions such as the States. For an example see the ludicrous conviction of the Xbox modder recently.

[johnistpropaganda]

From the RIAA's web site:
http://www.riaa.com/issues/piracy/penalties.asp



Where the infringing activity is for commercial advantage or private financial gain, sound recording infringements can be punishable by up to five years in prison and $250,000 in fines. Repeat offenders can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. Violators can also be held civilly liable for actual damages, lost profits, or statutory damages up to $150,000 per infringement, as well as attorney’s fees and costs.

The online infringement of copyrighted music can be punished by up to 3 years in prison and $250,000 in fines. Repeat offenders can be imprisoned up to 6 years. Individuals also may be held civilly liable, regardless of whether the activity is for profit, for actual damages or lost profits, or for statutory damages up to $150,000 per infringed copyright

I think the first paragraph could possibly be applied to someone giving away a "mix tape."
I included the second because obviously filesharing is a popular activity.

Having trouble finding figures that would relate to my original post tho. will prolly take a bit more searching.

@lerrup said: "...they are unlikely to come after endusers but would happily chase a distributor, such as Canonical."

This is part of the reason i started this thread. If M$ ever begins to see Ubuntu as a real threat, they could spin canonical as a company similar to those "evil" filesharing services.

And a note about marijuana: in my home state of mississippi, smoking a joint or having < one ounce will get you a fine and you will lose your driver's liscence for six months, even if your a hundred miles from the nearest vehicle, and maybe like 90 days jail time, although that is unusual. It becomes federal if you are within a mile from a school, have more than an ounce, have more than four plants, or if you get nailed with intent to destribute ( note that having two small baggies of your favorite BC buds can be construed as intent to destribute). In other states, such as oklahoma, the penalties are much more severe.

what can i say, i used to read hightimes.

-jp-

[egon spengler]

You want to talk about perspectives, and maximum vs. average.
I'm sorry if I'm getting too opinonated but I get very upset when heinous crimes get minimal sentencing.

What's the relation to copyright infringement? You were talking about how unjust it is that people get longer sentences for stealing cds than they do for sex crimes.