DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright
-
@dashrender said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
I honestly can't believe I'm the only person who sees this for what it is.
Because there is a principal.
I think most of us here see your point - these people are making money off crooks. They target thieves as an audience.
But there is nothing illegal about that specifically.
Ok but lets look at the bank robber and get-away driver scenario.
Presumably the get-away driver is being paid. That there is the issue and thus makes the entire thing illegal. Now if DragonBox was giving these boxes away, not making a dime. Then the case would be one of just using open and freely available solutions.
-
@tim_g said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@scottalanmiller said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@tim_g said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@scottalanmiller said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@tim_g said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
I don't agree with the whole punishing the innocent. That seems to be what's happening here.
Exactly. I'm okay with copyright law, if the LAW was followed. It is not.
I've always thought this too. The concept is fine, but it's always abused in pretty much every single case and every single way possible.
Even the concept has issues, but I'm kinda okay with it. But copyright is REALLY complicated when you actually get down to it and it doesn't work very well and never has. Technically, copyright makes things like libraries illegal.
Yes, but if I spend lots of time and money designing Object1 (then copyright it), and start selling it... someone comes along and buys it, then produces an exact copy of it, and starts selling and profiting from it himself... that's is what I feel it should stop.
See, this is a grey area for me.... I mostly see what you're saying.. but at the same time, more often than not, the law is used to stop innovation, hindering us as a people.
If you really want to keep making money from Object1, then you just have to keep innovating it so that people want yours, and not the other guys.
-
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@dashrender said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
I honestly can't believe I'm the only person who sees this for what it is.
Because there is a principal.
I think most of us here see your point - these people are making money off crooks. They target thieves as an audience.
But there is nothing illegal about that specifically.
Ok but lets look at the bank robber and get-away driver scenario.
Presumably the get-away driver is being paid. That there is the issue and thus makes the entire thing illegal. Now if DragonBox was giving these boxes away, not making a dime. Then the case would be one of just using open and freely available solutions.
If DragonBox was giving it away free, they would still be getting sued. Napster was given away free, and they were sued.
-
@dashrender said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
@tim_g said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@scottalanmiller said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@tim_g said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@scottalanmiller said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@tim_g said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
I don't agree with the whole punishing the innocent. That seems to be what's happening here.
Exactly. I'm okay with copyright law, if the LAW was followed. It is not.
I've always thought this too. The concept is fine, but it's always abused in pretty much every single case and every single way possible.
Even the concept has issues, but I'm kinda okay with it. But copyright is REALLY complicated when you actually get down to it and it doesn't work very well and never has. Technically, copyright makes things like libraries illegal.
Yes, but if I spend lots of time and money designing Object1 (then copyright it), and start selling it... someone comes along and buys it, then produces an exact copy of it, and starts selling and profiting from it himself... that's is what I feel it should stop.
See, this is a grey area for me.... I mostly see what you're saying.. but at the same time, more often than not, the law is used to stop innovation, hindering us as a people.
If you really want to keep making money from Object1, then you just have to keep innovating it so that people want yours, and not the other guys.
In my scenario, it was copied and not changed, and then resold... that is what should be illegal.
But if someone bought Object1, and made it better... fair game.
-
How do you not see the ISPs as just as complicit in this issue?
-
And on the point of the get-away driver. There is nothing illegal about driving a car with passengers.
What is illegal is the act of helping them to get away with the crime. That is the accomplice part, they (dragonbox) is an accomplice to the people that are stealing the content from the content developers.
-
@dashrender said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@dashrender said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
I honestly can't believe I'm the only person who sees this for what it is.
Because there is a principal.
I think most of us here see your point - these people are making money off crooks. They target thieves as an audience.
But there is nothing illegal about that specifically.
Ok but lets look at the bank robber and get-away driver scenario.
Presumably the get-away driver is being paid. That there is the issue and thus makes the entire thing illegal. Now if DragonBox was giving these boxes away, not making a dime. Then the case would be one of just using open and freely available solutions.
If DragonBox was giving it away free, they would still be getting sued. Napster was given away free, and they were sued.
Napster was sued because they had the ability to stop theft and didn't. Look at the court summary, it's explained in plain text there.
-
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
And on the point of the get-away driver. There is nothing illegal about driving a car with passengers.
What is illegal is the act of helping them to get away with the crime. That is the accomplice part, they (dragonbox) is an accomplice to the people that are stealing the content from the content developers.
I'd say timing is a HUGE factor here. The driver in your example is helping them knowingly during the crime.. escaping is likely still part of crime.
But with Dragon.. they sell you a box, and from then on, they aren't part of the equation.
-
@dashrender said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
How do you not see the ISPs as just as complicit in this issue?
The same reason that I can't call the road an accomplice to the get-away driver.
It's there, it isn't assisting in some active way. It was built for the purposes of getting things from Point A to Point B. It wasn't build to assist in theft.
-
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
And on the point of the get-away driver. There is nothing illegal about driving a car with passengers.
What is illegal is the act of helping them to get away with the crime. That is the accomplice part, they (dragonbox) is an accomplice to the people that are stealing the content from the content developers.
The object doesn't do anything at all, until a person actually commits a crime.
In the getaway driver scenario, it's the action. The dragonbox doesn't do anything illegal until you make it.
Just like the car doesn't do anything. The getaway driver scenario is like suing Ford or Chevy... because it's the person driving it who is doing the criminal act.
-
@dashrender said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
And on the point of the get-away driver. There is nothing illegal about driving a car with passengers.
What is illegal is the act of helping them to get away with the crime. That is the accomplice part, they (dragonbox) is an accomplice to the people that are stealing the content from the content developers.
I'd say timing is a HUGE factor here. The driver in your example is helping them knowingly during the crime.. escaping is likely still part of crime.
But with Dragon.. they sell you a box, and from then on, they aren't part of the equation.
OK lets take a look at this
Nothing illegal in calling for a Uber to arrive at X time, the driver in this case has no clue who they are picking up (this would be an ISP). Just a location and a time to arrive, where to come from and go to.
That doesn't make the driver an accomplice.
-
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
I honestly can't believe I'm the only person who sees this for what it is.
No, we all see it for what it is. We just think that there is nothing wrong with that, because there isn't. You have an issue with things that we see as good things.
-
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@dashrender said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
How do you not see the ISPs as just as complicit in this issue?
The same reason that I can't call the road an accomplice to the get-away driver.
It's there, it isn't assisting in some active way. It was built for the purposes of getting things from Point A to Point B. It wasn't build to assist in theft.
But you can if you call the DragonBox an accomplice. The road is actively paving the way to escape (pun intended) just like DragonBox paves the way for both good, and bad, things.
-
Can a road be used for good? Yes
Can a road be used for crime? YesCan DragonBox be used legally? Yes
Can DragonBox be used illegally? Yes -
@scottalanmiller said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@dashrender said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
How do you not see the ISPs as just as complicit in this issue?
The same reason that I can't call the road an accomplice to the get-away driver.
It's there, it isn't assisting in some active way. It was built for the purposes of getting things from Point A to Point B. It wasn't build to assist in theft.
But you can if you call the DragonBox an accomplice. The road is actively paving the way to escape (pun intended) just like DragonBox paves the way for both good, and bad, things.
No the road is the ISP, literally has no means of stopping a car from driving down it. The police would have to stop that vehicle from traveling.
-
The car are the packets, and the robbers are literally the stolen content.
-
@scottalanmiller said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
Can a road be used for good? Yes
Can a road be used for crime? YesCan DragonBox be used legally? Yes
Can DragonBox be used illegally? YesChange out road with car. Same result.
It's the person committing the crime, not the object.
-
Guns don't kill people, people kill people.
DragonBox doesn't pirate things, people pirate things. -
@tim_g said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
@scottalanmiller said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
Can a road be used for good? Yes
Can a road be used for crime? YesCan DragonBox be used legally? Yes
Can DragonBox be used illegally? YesChange out road with car. Same result.
It's the person committing the crime, not the object.
Let's take your example 1 step further.
Can a gun be used for good? Yes
Can a gun be used for bad? YesCan a gun kill a person? No
Can a person wielding a gun kill a person? YesIf you make a gun easier to wield, then it's easier for people to be killed.
-
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@dashrender said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
@dashrender said in DragonBox, Streaming Services, and Copyright:
@dustinb3403 said in DragonBox, Straming Services, and Copyright:
I honestly can't believe I'm the only person who sees this for what it is.
Because there is a principal.
I think most of us here see your point - these people are making money off crooks. They target thieves as an audience.
But there is nothing illegal about that specifically.
Ok but lets look at the bank robber and get-away driver scenario.
Presumably the get-away driver is being paid. That there is the issue and thus makes the entire thing illegal. Now if DragonBox was giving these boxes away, not making a dime. Then the case would be one of just using open and freely available solutions.
If DragonBox was giving it away free, they would still be getting sued. Napster was given away free, and they were sued.
Napster was sued because they had the ability to stop theft and didn't. Look at the court summary, it's explained in plain text there.
See, that's crap. That's just a statement. I'm not really sure they could have stopped it..
