General Discussion

Fred Drum

(293 posts)

25. copying them would be a copyright violation

Sat Sep 6, 2014, 01:57 PM

Sep 2014

not theft, not just like theft, not almost theft

it would be exactly like copyright violation

now cracking apple's iCloud, violating the computer fraud and abuse act, there's the money shot

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

70 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Cracked: "What We REALLY Mean When We Talk About Leaked Pics" [View all] nomorenomore08 Sep 2014 OP

I refuse to look at them PeoViejo Sep 2014 #1

Even if the damage is done, so to speak, one need not participate in the exploitation oneself. n/t nomorenomore08 Sep 2014 #2

I'm abivalent on this, in practice. Helen Borg Sep 2014 #3

Me neither, by and large. Even if I think it's tacky at best. n/t nomorenomore08 Sep 2014 #5

..but you are giving Money to the perpetrators. PeoViejo Sep 2014 #6

But anyone who looks is including himself or herself in the group that is hurting these women. pnwmom Sep 2014 #15

Lol, I looked and... MoleyRusselsWart Sep 2014 #11

Very funny....... PeoViejo Sep 2014 #12

Le Results Blue_Adept Sep 2014 #17

To the alerter MoleyRusselsWart Sep 2014 #30

that's twice RussBLib Sep 2014 #45

You are not the furthest thing from misogynistic kcr Sep 2014 #51

Post removed Post removed Sep 2014 #59

You're right, I don't know you. I can only go based on what you post here. kcr Sep 2014 #62

I will concede MoleyRusselsWart Sep 2014 #63

Nah, you're just a scumbag whose posts I'll never value. abelenkpe Sep 2014 #56

Lol, scumbag? MoleyRusselsWart Sep 2014 #61

Stop - please stop JustAnotherGen Sep 2014 #65

That was over the top. But I don't blame people for getting irritated. nomorenomore08 Sep 2014 #70

"Is (theoretically) getting aroused by the sight of a beautiful naked women suddenly Misogynistic??" nomorenomore08 Sep 2014 #69

this article is a terrific read. Daniel O'Brien explains the issue perfectly BlancheSplanchnik Sep 2014 #4

He also does not hold the victims totally blameless either, refreshing. Fred Sanders Sep 2014 #8

that's good too. he sure put responsibility where it BELONGS, in this article. BlancheSplanchnik Sep 2014 #66

He usually does get the point about many different things Warpy Sep 2014 #54

Cracked used to be a weak version of Mad Magazine, so BlancheSplanchnik Sep 2014 #67

Just throwing out there that... MoleyRusselsWart Sep 2014 #7

Another excellent article from Cracked... SidDithers Sep 2014 #9

Agreed. John Cheese has some very insightful columns there too arcane1 Sep 2014 #28

A owned a thing. B stole it. Let's blame A for having the audacity to own a thing in the first place progressoid Sep 2014 #10

A owned a thing. A still owns a thing Fred Drum Sep 2014 #13

Violating copyright is a type of theft. And viewing someone's stolen pnwmom Sep 2014 #16

wrong in so many ways Fred Drum Sep 2014 #18

If he continues with that show, they have the right to sue him and they will win. pnwmom Sep 2014 #19

fair use clearly applies Fred Drum Sep 2014 #20

Fair use doesn't allow the use of an entire image without permission, and it doesn't pnwmom Sep 2014 #21

i don't think you understand fair use Fred Drum Sep 2014 #23

I don't think you do. The US appeals case I just referred you to is much more related pnwmom Sep 2014 #24

as i said, every case is different Fred Drum Sep 2014 #26

If he's displaying whole, unpublished (by the copyright owner) images, he will lose on fair use. n/t pnwmom Sep 2014 #31

from 17 U.S.C. � 107 Fred Drum Sep 2014 #32

The part you deliberately left out is the key part: pnwmom Sep 2014 #33

please continue Fred Drum Sep 2014 #39

Please read the article discussing the Appeals Court decision. It discusses the four factors pnwmom Sep 2014 #40

Fair use doctrine is a fairly broad one. hifiguy Sep 2014 #36

The issue concerns an artist and a gallery, not a broke teenager. If they are sued, pnwmom Sep 2014 #38

Try and prove up the damages, though. hifiguy Sep 2014 #42

Copyrights are property. progressoid Sep 2014 #22

i agree victim blaming is WRONG Fred Drum Sep 2014 #29

lucky for us that the FBI doesn't write the laws Fred Drum Sep 2014 #41

They enforce the laws, and determine who they will prosecute. pnwmom Sep 2014 #52

as i've stated a couple of times now Fred Drum Sep 2014 #57

They can be charged with theft of intellectual property, because intellectual property was stolen.nt pnwmom Sep 2014 #64

we're just arguing past each other Fred Drum Sep 2014 #68

Idiotic Logic sub.theory Sep 2014 #35

There is a difference between justifying something and hifiguy Sep 2014 #43

More blaming the victims sub.theory Sep 2014 #47

Bullshit. hifiguy Sep 2014 #48

Bullshit yourself sub.theory Sep 2014 #50

I was not referring to that particular theft. hifiguy Sep 2014 #60

Post removed Post removed Sep 2014 #44

It is theft and it's a crime sub.theory Sep 2014 #46

i'm not minimizing anything Fred Drum Sep 2014 #49

Useless sub.theory Sep 2014 #53

i agree with this Fred Drum Sep 2014 #58

But A owned something that I think was immoral! Blue_Adept Sep 2014 #14

If I grope your ass on the train, you still own it, right? hunter Sep 2014 #37

Celebrities bore me. cwydro Sep 2014 #55