Legal and forum rule-related discussion concerning BF2142 mini image

[DABhand]

It doesnt matter if the rules are rewritten or not.

People still wont read them and still post away.

And to be honest you cant come along one day and try to get rules changed just because they didnt suit yourself. Doesnt work like that at all.

And I question your knowledge of what goes on.


Hackers and Crackers are different types. People removing protections are crackers, people who break into systems and do what they do are hackers.


And again you can make a backup of YOUR media if the permission is given, what you can NOT do is download media different ways from other people or receive a burned backup of someone elses media it is Illegal, no matter what peoples' Lawyer friends may say.

There is a selected few cases where games can be given out freely, mostly these are MMORPG's for example World of Warcraft, which Blizzard gives you the right to allow to give a friend a backup of your media so they can use a Trial Key.

[siiix]

Originally Posted by DABhand

#1 you cant come along one day and try to get rules changed just because they didnt suit yourself

#2you can make a backup of YOUR media if the permission is given, what you can NOT do is download media different ways from other people or receive a burned backup of someone elses media it is Illegal, no matter what peoples' Lawyer friends may say.

#1 they fit me very well, i just said they not clear, and so i had the feeling this board is WAY les strict then they owners actually attended

#2 your wrong, you DO NOT need permission, with is the same law in all strict countries
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-digital.html

in fact EVEN if the digital medias T&C states that your not allowed to make a backup you are by law, the global copyright laws are above the T&C, there are several precedence cases like that you can read up on (just search)

as the other guy above also stated the license is extended to your backup
I add to this that so long as you hold the license the backup is still covered even if the original media or data is lost

what is confusing to some guys: IF you PAY for a pirated/illegal “backup” copy then even if you own a license you commit a crime

plus I do have practical experience in the matter, as might you noticed I’m no brave citizen ; )

I might like to add that #1 and #2 are not connected topics !!! one has nothing to do with the other

[DABhand]

Lets see shall we what they say here.


Can I backup my computer software?
Yes, under certain conditions as provided by section 117 of the Copyright Act. Although the precise term used under section 117 is “archival” copy, not “backup” copy, these terms today are used interchangeably. This privilege extends only to computer programs and not to other types of works.

Under section 117, you or someone you authorize may make a copy of an original computer program if:

1. the new copy is being made for archival (i.e., backup) purposes only;

2. you are the legal owner of the copy; and

3. any copy made for archival purposes is either destroyed, or transferred with the original copy, once the original copy is sold, given away, or otherwise transferred.

4. You are not permitted under section 117 to make a backup copy of other material on a computer's hard drive, such as other copyrighted works that have been downloaded (e.g., music, films).

It is also important to check the terms of sale or license agreement of the original copy of software in case any special conditions have been put in place by the copyright owner that might affect your ability or right under section 117 to make a backup copy. There is no other provision in the Copyright Act that specifically authorizes the making of backup copies of works other than computer programs even if those works are distributed as digital copies.




Not lets see a key word you neglected to read in there, there word being "authorised", as in given permission. Did you miss that word.

EDIT: You can only authorise this if you are the legally binding owner of the data, which is subject to the developer/publisher. Which you are not.

Also.

"2. you are the legal owner of the copy;"

If you download an image you are NOT the legal owner of that copy. Again your wrong on the part of downloading games is legal as a copy purpose. This basically states as I have said, you can only backup/copy YOUR original and no one elses.

And just to reconfirm this, you missed out on this part also

"Is it legal to download works from peer-to-peer networks and if not, what is the penalty for doing so?
Uploading or downloading works protected by copyright without the authority of the copyright owner is an infringement of the copyright owner's exclusive rights of reproduction and/or distribution. Anyone found to have infringed a copyrighted work may be liable for statutory damages up to $30,000 for each work infringed and, if willful infringement is proven by the copyright owner, that amount may be increased up to $150,000 for each work infringed. In addition, an infringer of a work may also be liable for the attorney's fees incurred by the copyright owner to enforce his or her rights.
Whether or not a particular work is being made available under the authority of the copyright owner is a question of fact. But since any original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium (including a computer file) is protected by federal copyright law upon creation, in the absence of clear information to the contrary, most works may be assumed to be protected by federal copyright law.
Since the files distributed over peer-to-peer networks are primarily copyrighted works, there is a risk of liability for downloading material from these networks. To avoid these risks, there are currently many "authorized" services on the Internet that allow consumers to purchase copyrighted works online, whether music, ebooks, or motion pictures. By purchasing works through authorized services, consumers can avoid the risks of infringement liability and can limit their exposure to other potential risks, e.g., viruses, unexpected material, or spyware."


See that word Authority again in that last quote, again only IF and only WHEN the owners of the software have given you permission to distribute software then you can, but they dont.

Also you fail to realise that you only have the right to play what is on that media, you own the CD or DVD but you do NOT own the content.

So again if you didnt get permission to make a backup then you cant. No if's or but's about it.

And btw US law isnt Global.

[Grumpy]

@siiix
Everything Dabhand has said in the above post is correct.
Sorry to say but the article you linked to just contradicts everything you have previously said!

Apart from the very important parts Dab pointed out this section is also very important:

Lesson: if you want a backup copy of a lawfully owned computer program, back it up yourself.

It does not matter if they are talking about 'buying', it is still the same if you download it for free! You would be stealing from someone who has not authorized the copy!

I have a question for you, does your lawyer friend actually make any money!?

[KeelMan]

@ siiix, ich bin kein poster sondern nur leser dieses boards, aber jetzt muss ich mal was posten, sonst geht's mir weiter schlecht

merkst du nicht wie dabhand grumpy + joeforster dich veräppeln und aufziehen

das sollte unter deiner würde sein. ich würde nicht weiter hier auf irgendetwas eingehen, denn diese leute haben das gewisse brett vorm kopf

ich liebe streitgespräche , fruchten sie aber nicht und schalten sich daraufhin immer weitere frontmacher dazu mit nicht zugänglichen argumenten, die sie hinter stereotypischen, schlecht formulierten aussagen verstecken, vergeht mir schlicht die list und lust

ich empfehle daher, zieh dich zurück ich geb dir ja recht!

[GLH]

Another one who did not read the board rules.
FileForums is an english-only forum !!!

With all these discussions, we already forgot the most important rule of the boards rules: RULE #11 The moderators are ALWAYS right!

[Joe Forster/STA]

KeelMan says that we're hiding ourselves behind stereotypes etc. and suggests that siiix draws himself back. I don't understand much more of his post, though, and he seems to have missed DABhand from the list...