Forum - View topicNEWS: Funimation's One Piece Simulcast Begins Tonight
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Brack
 Posts: 288 Location: UK |
|
|||||
Arctic Anime were constantly accused of being bootleggers ([url]http://groups.google.co.uk/group/rec.arts.anime.marketplace/ browse_thread/thread/aa6ab63f76435c79/c4729096ae8461e6?hl=en &ie=UTF-8&q=Arctic+Anime#c4729096ae8461e6[/url]), it's not like it was legal then either, nor was there some sort hallowed golden age of fansubbing. |
||||||
|
||||||
Revolutionary
 Posts: 607 Location: New England |
|
|||||
I'm afraid I completely disagree with you. I watch One Piece on the site because I love One Piece. All I care about is seeing the anime. =/ I honestly didn't think that anybody watched it for other reasons. D: |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Brack
Posts: 288 Location: UK |
|
|||||
Part of the reasoning in screening a title is to appeal to new viewers, not just the devoted. That's why One Piece constantly recaps each episode any facts needed for the current episode. It's been running 10 years, it can't just appeal to the kid who was there at day one. If you make it hard to watch, or a pain to watch, you aren't going to get the new viewers to stick around. Given that Viz are planning on playing catch up with the manga next year, then watching One Piece needs to be as easy to watch as Naruto is. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Revolutionary
Posts: 607 Location: New England |
|
|||||
|
How is it not?
Are you referring to issues with the video player? If that's so than I can agree with that. They definitely need to get that worked out. However Crunchy Roll has always gave me trouble as well. It's not just FUNimation's Video Player. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Brack
Posts: 288 Location: UK |
|
|||||
Yes, though also the geoblocking is an issue too (though that's probably short sighted-ness on Toei's part). So I can't actually check if it's improved since the days of 250MB streaming flash files, as I can't actually see the show, unlike Gintama and Naruto. But the size of the files Funimation were streaming when I could see it, was my main reason to not want to have anything to do with their site. I've experienced some Crunchyroll problems too (normally the disappearing subtitles issue), but the actual content delivers a lot faster than Funimation's did. And Funimation's content delivers a lot faster on Joost too (a site I've had no issues with). |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Yoda117
Posts: 406 |
|
|||||
Apologies for the thread tunnel... Please note that I made the reference specific to the US. Obviously, other countries interpretation of the law is different (and if they're keeping strictly to various international conventions, then it might not have been legal, based on that country's interpretation of items such as the Bearne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works... though the Convention's definition of "fair use" in some versions would permit an act such as fansubbing; every country is different). In the US, there was the precedent set in US v. LaMacchia, where the defendant was found not guilty because he was not considered to be profiting from his actions ("illegal copying and distribution of copyrighted materials"). The courts sided with LaMacchia, indicating that since the defendant's acts were done without a request for compensation (though he did ask for donations to better provide services for those who wanted the materials he was accused of copying and distributing, he did so separately), and since there was nothing truly "physical" in the taking, that the court had to grant for LaMacchia's motion to be dismissed. It is interesting to note that the court did not justify what LaMacchia had done, but stated that the laws were currently inadequate to enforce charges against the defendant. So, yes, the US courts (remember my comment was only based in my home country... laws of other countries might be different), may not have found such actions agreeable, but it could and would not enforce any action against people who were distributing copyrighted materials without profit. A "golden age of fansubbing" it was not. But it was also non-punishable and non-enforceable at that time as well. The courts were very specific in stating that this was a matter more for legislature than for the courts at this time (i.e., you need to update the law or create a new one). Fast forward to 1997 and you have the No Electronic Theft (NET) Act, which stated quite specifically that regardless of whether there was compensation exchanged or not, that the distribution of copyrighted materials without permission from the holder was a punishable offense. The NET Act was different from previous laws in that it not only removed the "by fan, for fan" style loopholes (often referred to as "LaMacchia's Loophole"), but was also the first true copyright law to use both civil and criminal penalities in it's writing (previous copyright laws usually had civil penalities, and criminal penalities were usually based separately on related charges or legislation). Since Arctic Anime was in Canada, I do not know what laws they were subject to and I'm not going to try and BS my way through them (nor in the UK). However, in the US, the fansub movement was only able to get as far as it did prior to 1997 because the laws weren't there to deal with the act. Even if law enforcement wanted to go after fansubbers (probably not, as anime was such a niche genre at the time), it wouldn't have had the legal standing to until after the NET Act was passed (which also amended Titles 17 and 18 of the US Code). |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group