I say go for it Catcher. See if PIA removes anything.
I agree. This would be a good test case to see how far PIA is willing to go in it's defense of "free speech."
Needless to say I personally hold a more conservative view of freedom of speech than Irryie, and robert_lazar and his "army" of sock puppets. I happen to believe that free speech can have necessary and obvious limitations, particularly in a company-owned forum which has a posted TOS which clearly delineates the extent that speech can extend to. I don't happen to believe that the posting of gay porn in a vpn forum comports with freedom of speech, or PIA's own TOS, which is why I complained about it yesterday. Here was one of the responses I got:
Thank you for bringing
this to our attention. I'm afraid that unless we were to go against the
very nature of the product we provide we wouldn't be able to prevent
such posts. I'm sorry for your experience but we value privacy and
security far too much to police the forums more strictly that we already
do. I apologize for your experience and thank you very much for your
patience and understanding! Thanks,
Greg M, Technical Support
So, clearly the TOS is meaningless and will not be enforced. That being the case I say go for it, Catcher, and post it all. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, happens from it.
Piracy is a civil crime, not a criminal one. Though according to the resident nut case, Irryie, talking to him on a forum and disagreeing with anything he says is "criminal stalking".
Copyright law allows you to retain one "backup copy" of any media you own a copy of. So those links you posted have a legal use catcher749.
But Irryie cannot get over his obsession and Psychic stalking of the entire forums long enough for even that much due diligence.
If only he could stop long enough to answer what his Interneck and Netwok terms mean?
Correction: Piracy (in the form of file sharing), is a civil offense, not a criminal offense.
It's important to be careful and specific in the use of our terms or we run the risk of causing confusion. Unfortunately, the term "piracy" has taken on much too broad of a definition to include disparate acts. "Piracy" has come to include relatively minor civil offenses, such as file sharing.
A "pirate" and "piracy" originated on the high seas, and high seas piracy is still not uncommon today.
"Piracy" later came to also include what is still done on the street corners of many developing countries -- the hawking of locally reproduced music CDs, video DVDs, unlicensed celebrity merchandise, "copy watches" (Rolex, etc.), and a host of other infringing products. I've seen it take place in many countries that I've traveled.
Because of such illicit activities the definition of "piracy" came to be expanded to include: "To appropriate or reproduce (the work or invention of another) without authority, for one's own profit." (OED)
File sharing is generally far removed from such flagrant abuses. The vast majority of file sharing occurs without any profit and, therefore, doesn't fit the classic definition. But file sharing can cross the line into actual "piracy" where it's done for profit, such as with those who run some of the large bittorrent tracker sites and file hosting sites that generate considerable ad revenue. I think it can be successfully argued that at least some of those sites are guilty of actual "piracy" and criminal copyright infringement.
The mere sharing of files by individuals on small scale, where there is no financial consideration or profit, is not a criminal offense, nor should it be. I'm personally troubled by file sharers calling themselves "pirates," or labeling what they do as "piracy." It's foolish and misguided.
I was addressing OmniNegro. Why does everything always have to be about you?
Your Narcissistic Personality Disorder is showing again.
No one was talking to you lrryie and no one cares about your opinions. Repeating yourself over and over again only further confirms to everyone how serious your mental health issues are.
Stop stalking me. Seek professional help for your mental health issues.
Comments
Needless to say I personally hold a more conservative view of freedom of speech than Irryie, and robert_lazar and his "army" of sock puppets. I happen to believe that free speech can have necessary and obvious limitations, particularly in a company-owned forum which has a posted TOS which clearly delineates the extent that speech can extend to. I don't happen to believe that the posting of gay porn in a vpn forum comports with freedom of speech, or PIA's own TOS, which is why I complained about it yesterday. Here was one of the responses I got:
Thanks,
Greg M, Technical Support
So, clearly the TOS is meaningless and will not be enforced. That being the case I say go for it, Catcher, and post it all. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, happens from it.
Copyright law allows you to retain one "backup copy" of any media you own a copy of. So those links you posted have a legal use catcher749.
But Irryie cannot get over his obsession and Psychic stalking of the entire forums long enough for even that much due diligence.
If only he could stop long enough to answer what his Interneck and Netwok terms mean?
Correction: Piracy (in the form of file sharing), is a civil offense, not a criminal offense.
It's important to be careful and specific in the use of our terms or we run the risk of causing confusion. Unfortunately, the term "piracy" has taken on much too broad of a definition to include disparate acts. "Piracy" has come to include relatively minor civil offenses, such as file sharing.
A "pirate" and "piracy" originated on the high seas, and high seas piracy is still not uncommon today.
"Piracy" later came to also include what is still done on the street corners of many developing countries -- the hawking of locally reproduced music CDs, video DVDs, unlicensed celebrity merchandise, "copy watches" (Rolex, etc.), and a host of other infringing products. I've seen it take place in many countries that I've traveled.
Because of such illicit activities the definition of "piracy" came to be expanded to include: "To appropriate or reproduce (the work or invention of another) without authority, for one's own profit." (OED)
File sharing is generally far removed from such flagrant abuses. The vast majority of file sharing occurs without any profit and, therefore, doesn't fit the classic definition. But file sharing can cross the line into actual "piracy" where it's done for profit, such as with those who run some of the large bittorrent tracker sites and file hosting sites that generate considerable ad revenue. I think it can be successfully argued that at least some of those sites are guilty of actual "piracy" and criminal copyright infringement.
The mere sharing of files by individuals on small scale, where there is no financial consideration or profit, is not a criminal offense, nor should it be. I'm personally troubled by file sharers calling themselves "pirates," or labeling what they do as "piracy." It's foolish and misguided.
No one was talking to you lrryie and no one cares about your opinions. Repeating yourself over and over again only further confirms to everyone how serious your mental health issues are.
Stop stalking me. Seek professional help for your mental health issues.