Forum - View topicNEWS: Japan's Lower House Approves Bill to Penalize Downloaders, Outlaw Ripping
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Mr. sickVisionz
 Posts: 2173 |
|
|||
This is malarkey imo. I'm only speaking from the US, but the ease of use and availability of legal content over the internet slaps most of what you said in the face. It's only becoming dangerous for people who refuse to play by the rules simply because on some level, they don't want a corporation to see benefit from something, even if the corporation provides the exact service they want at little or no cost. Saying entertainment is becoming a dangerous hobby makes as much sense as saying basketball is becoming a dangerous hobby because store owners prosecute people who shoplift equipment and venues prosecute people sneaking into NBA games without paying. It's only dangerous for those seeking to make it dangerous. People not trying to break the rules, laws, and regulations with every move they make aren't being endangered in the least. |
||||
|
||||
|
Clyde_Cash
Posts: 376 |
|
|||
|
If you outlaw rips, only outlaws will have rips! The only crime is if you sell the DVD rips for a profit!
|
||||
|
||||
|
mangamuscle
Posts: 2658 Location: Mexico |
|
|||
I would not rule out the posibility that they ask the USA goverment for extradition of indiivduals outside japan that go against this law, it would not be the first time in the 21st century that goverments apply their laws beyond their borders. |
||||
|
||||
Brent Allison
 Posts: 2444 Location: Athens-Clarke County, GA, USA |
|
|||
I actually would rule out that possibility, because the effective power of governments to extradite is not symmetrical nor independent of context, even among developed nations. It's one thing for the American government to go after a German national like Kim Dotcom in New Zealand who was making a handy profit off of copyright infringement. It's quite another for the Japanese government to have an American extradited for simply downloading anime, especially when a bill like SOPA - which would have criminalized the provision, not downloading of copyrighted content - was defeated after public outcry. The Americans would have none of it if one of their own was sent to Japan in handcuffs just for downloading anime for personal use. |
||||
|
||||
|
mangamuscle
Posts: 2658 Location: Mexico |
|
|||
You speak about "The Americans" like some kind of unified force that prevents the goverment from even thinking about eroding their rights. The SOPA bill rejection was an exception, mostly motivated by the rejection it suffered in Europe. But every day civil liberties in the USA keep eroding at an alarming rate, you can quote me if tomorrow Sony goes directly against an american fansubbing group using this law. |
||||
|
||||
|
Lupica
Posts: 89 |
|
|||
But it's not morally ok to destroy sales of a product either by cloning it and giving it away for free. It's not technically stealing, in law, but it's a pretty low thing to do.
It won't happen anyway, but if it did, wouldn't it be interesting if it led to a future where fansubbers make the -timed scripts- available (this is already possible) and people create plug-ins to overlay them onto DVDs people already bought when they play them back on their computers? I can't see anyone being particularly upset over people doing that in order to spend more through the industry. The entire problem with fansubbers isn't that they're translating things for other fans, it's that those translations just happen to come with the entire commercial product attached and encourage people to develop an attitude that it's ok not to pay for things any more. Which it isn't. |
||||
|
||||
|
Xanas
Posts: 2058 |
|
|||
1) Define "morally ok"? What makes something moral or not? 2) Is the problem "destroy sales" or "cloning it"? If it's the former, how do you know it really did destroy sales? Furthermore, if it's the former, should the cafe in this article be sued for selling a painting and thus stealing the business away from the upscale restaurant Joe Salerno would have gone to in the absence of that event? If not, why not? If it's the latter, how do you delineate between what is ok to copy and what isn't?
There is not necessarily "attitude" but there is always self-interest. People prefer a better state for one that is worst and to expend the least effort possible to obtain their goals. For those who don't copy or share they have a different set of values that add up to a preference for avoiding downloading. It seems like what you want is to get more people to be interested in "paying for things" but what you haven't shown here is how the law actually accomplishes a change in people's attitudes. It's as if you said that the amendment prohibiting alcohol made it where people didn't desire it during prohibition, but this was clearly not the case. Sure, some people may not have continued drinking due to the law, but I don't think anyone can claim it successfully removed people's desire to drink. Also, as for having the ability and desire to download, I can tell you from my own personal experience that it hardly makes me not interested in paying for things. I am probably on the mid-upper end in this forum in terms of the amount of anime I buy, spending a few thousand a year on anime. |
||||
|
||||
jhuhn
 Posts: 147 |
|
|||
|
Actually, the penalty can also be both a fine of up to 2M Yen and two years imprisonment. So if you're in Japan, EYES ONLY! DO NOT COPY! This is just as bad as stealing cable with an illegal black box.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Xanas
Posts: 2058 |
|
|||
It's a false equivocation, in the case of cable... either 1) You agreed not to use certain devices when you signed up for the service, or 2) You tapped someone elses line or hacked into a server both of which qualify as physical trespass of property. #1 is a contract breach and they have right to terminate service for it #2 is a violation of property rights. In both cases there are legitimate issues/contracts in play, while with "downloaders" there is no contract they have agreed to and the people they are downloading from are ok with them doing so. These laws will push more people in Japan towards VPN services probably. |
||||
|
||||
|
Mr. sickVisionz
Posts: 2173 |
|
|||
This example makes absolutely no sense in the context of piracy. Your example is a guy going to a restaurant because his wife likes the decor more than another restaurant. How is that comparative to taking a product that someone is trying to sell and giving it away for free to anyone who wants it? Also, copyright laws established decades upon decades ago setup what is ok to copy and what isn't. I always chuckle when people seem clueless about this or act like intellectual property is this huge new gray area that we don't yet have laws to cover or protect. I also love the idea that sales won't be hurt when you take a product designed to be sold and you give away that identical product for free to thousands of people via the internet and other methods. If these were physical products, would anyone argue that magically cloning every car at a dealership and giving it away for free wouldn't hurt car sales at that dealership? The only difference between the two is that with IP, you actually can magically clone it. |
||||
|
||||
Sunday Silence
 Posts: 2047 |
|
|||
Given how much Anti-Japanese sentiment there is in the USA (See Whale Wars/Sea Shepard, "Revenge for Pearl Harbor" references after the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami, Fukushima Radiation Fears, the 2011 FIFA Women's World Cup Final vitrol towards the Japanese, etc.), the USA would've turn into a virtual police state long before the USA allows a US citizen to be extradited to Japan over downloading an episode of One Piece. |
||||
|
||||
Polycell
 Posts: 4623 |
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
walw6pK4Alo
 Posts: 9322 |
|
|||
Well, copyright infringement doesn't quite compare to those examples, but the laws need some serious retooling for the modern era. Just one of the things that annoys me: 75 years after death to enter public domain is outrageous. And even then that's not good enough for some. |
||||
|
||||
|
Polycell
Posts: 4623 |
|
|||
|
I was referring to the fact that those had stood for centuries before being really challenged, rather than a moral equivocation. But the digital age really magnifies the problems and abuses of copyright law. Really, if it's got any utility at all, the old 14 year term would be about the limit(and a work falling into the public domain needs to be an irreversible event).
|
||||
|
||||
|
Mesonoxian Eve
Posts: 1858 |
|
|||
Then you should know your posts leave me in stitches from laughing so hard. Restaurant decor. 
|
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group