Forum - View topic

NEWS: One Piece's Newest Episode Leaked Before Japan's Debut

The definition of computer hacking allows for exceeding authorized access. The changing of a url to get to a file from a website that was not meant to be shown for 24 hours is clearly "exceeding authorized access".

Charred Knight wrote:

Daizo wrote: Indeed, as the one who put the torrent up probably seeded it too, which would be copyright infringement. But as I said, spreading information about the leak by FUNimation in the way I explained would be completely legal. FUNimation is the one that leaked the episode, the other people just performed copyright infringement by spreading the leaked episode further via seeding the torrent for the file. The only one to blame for the leaking itself is FUNimation as they are the ones who leaked it. So if I see a guy with his gun nearbye, then I shoot the guy I shouldn't be arrested for murder because his Gun wasn't properly secured? Your posts are nothing but making excuses for copyright infridgement.

Is it just me who seems to notice that Daizo never claimed they did NOT perform copyright infringement and simply gave a theoretical situation where copyright infringement would not apply.
The loss of income you are trying to debate is from a breach of contract(most likely) and not from copyright infringement, the copyright infringement loss of income would only be on the same scale as any other fansub.

hikaru004 wrote:

The definition of computer hacking allows for exceeding authorized access. The changing of a url to get to a file from a website that was not meant to be shown for 24 hours is clearly "exceeding authorized access".

Except there's no "exceeding authorized access" in accessing files that have public read permission, in other words their authorized access includes public read permission as in anyone is free to download the files in question with public read permission. If FUNimation had denied public read permission for the files (which can be done with very simple CHMODing), it would be "exceeding authorized access" if any public user would get their hands on that particular file on the server, but again, this was not the case here where the file had public read permission.

How many times do I need to repeat this?

My stance is by accessing a file before it was meant to be shown is exceeding authorized access

It was authorized to be accessed on May 30th 9 PM CDT.

Any viewing before then is unauthorized.

So even if the file itself has been allowed to public read permission, you do not have the allowances to take just by going to their site. So guess what? The person who did this is still infringing.

@dan88: That Twitter post occurred after the leak was found and posted. FMA:B was prob taken down as a result of the OP leak. The ANN news timeline strongly suggests that. It's not like FUNi is going to come out and say that.

IMO, this is an extremely bad decision for Toei and FUNimation to make. It means the "pirate" wins and the fans lose.

I didn't say that the other 2 titles were loss. Their streaming (FMA and Phantom) was disrupted for a time. However, with streaming disruption, there is loss of income. Calling in staff (IT staff) off hours also results in loss of income.

And in all honesty, do you think Toei cares about this "extremely bad decision"? They only care about what's written on a legal document, not what regular Joe Schmoes like us think.

GaryPotter wrote:

Anyone who thinks TV is going to die is smoking wacko tobacco.

TV as you know it is going to die. The future is in converged, on-demand media over the Internet.

Obviously it isn't going to happen over night. It's going to be a long a drawn out process, much like the slow death that newspapers and magazines are going through right now.

But I'm willing to bet a lot of money that in 10 years (yes, my money (investments) is where my mouth is), when you sit down in front of your TV to watch episode xx of your favorite show, it will be at the time of your choosing, it will be on demand, and no local TV station will be involved.

-t

NO ONE here knows what's on that legal document, so speculation is irrelevant. If Toei demanded the cancellation of the simulcast, I'm more inclined to believe it's to put pressure on fan sub sites rather than themselves for a PSA of "See why fan subs are bad?"

The fallout of this is too early to speculate, but I'm guessing Toei's going to find out just how much hurting fans is going to come back to bite them.

People don't care about downloaders/fan sub sites when they make the ethically right decision to do what the companies in charge ask them to do.

Imagine how they feel now. No legal document is going to circumvent this feeling.

You're perfectly right, but that doesn't excuse Funi's poor security. Assuming a moral high ground point of view doesn't validate a pro-funi argument, either, since it's Funi's responsibility to protect their assets. That this episode was uploaded is irrelevant, given people could have simply gone on to download future episodes by being in on the security flaw.

Blaming the "culprit" here is meaningless, since all he/she did was change the distribution channel so as to provide to a wider audience. Nothing changed.

Really, if there's one thing you learn that is paramount in any business, it's that you learn to protect your assets. This is basic knowledge, which Funi did not apply. That they should get a pass because their fanbase "disrespected" them is an inane argument, at best.

[...] the uploader is going to get his head handed to him for violating the law, as people should when they break the law.