Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please.

On 2008-02-08, Bill Kearney <wkearney99.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I doubt they care very much about what's available via OTA.
>
> Yeah, they're already BROADCASTING it for free, heh.
>
> It's certainly THEFT OF SERVICE. You're providing a copy of content that

What service? What "theft"?

If it's OTA then it's already BEING GIVEN AWAY FOR FREE.

It's like going into someone else's "free store" and trying to
apprehend customers coming out because your limited worldview can't
see them as anything but shoplifters.

> wouldn't otherwise be available without having paid for the service. You're,
> in essense, stealing it. Dodge all you like but it certainly won't justify
> the crime.

If you want to engage in moral masturbation at least try starting
with the right law.


--


The average IT manager is a less effective mentor than a
Spongebob Squarepants cartoon.


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 >> Stay informed about: Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please. 

"JEDIDIAH" <jedi.DeleteThis@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message
news:slrnfqpshb.i0s.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
> On 2008-02-08, Bill Kearney <wkearney99.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> I doubt they care very much about what's available via OTA.
>>
>> Yeah, they're already BROADCASTING it for free, heh.
>>
>> It's certainly THEFT OF SERVICE. You're providing a copy of content that
>
> What service? What "theft"?

Still as stupid as usual, that's no suprise. Seems actually reading the
thread would be too much for you.
 >> Stay informed about: Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please. 

On 2008-02-10, Bill Kearney <wkearney99.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> "JEDIDIAH" <jedi.RemoveThis@nomad.mishnet> wrote in message
> news:slrnfqpshb.i0s.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
>> On 2008-02-08, Bill Kearney <wkearney99.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I doubt they care very much about what's available via OTA.
>>>
>>> Yeah, they're already BROADCASTING it for free, heh.
>>>
>>> It's certainly THEFT OF SERVICE. You're providing a copy of content that
>>
>> What service? What "theft"?
>
> Still as stupid as usual, that's no suprise. Seems actually reading the
> thread would be too much for you.
>
>

>>> Yeah, they're already BROADCASTING it for free, heh.

No, you are just pulling this notion of "theft of service" from your
nether regions. While there is certainly enough to object to about the
situation, you have entirely missed it.

--


The average IT manager is a less effective mentor than a
Spongebob Squarepants cartoon.


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 >> Stay informed about: Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please. 

> No, you are just pulling this notion of "theft of service" from your
> nether regions. While there is certainly enough to object to about the
> situation, you have entirely missed it.

Hmmm, re-read the thread:

"Art" <art.RemoveThis@myantiqueradio.com> wrote in message
news:rISdnfOUL4rktDTanZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@comcast.com...
>I do a lot of DVD burning to pass shows on to in-laws who have no cable and
> to son who can't afford cable.

Burning copies of programming obtained from a paid service, and giving said
copies to others as a means to avoid their paying for that service. Fair
use certainly doesn't apply to it.
 >> Stay informed about: Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please. 

On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 16:22:37 -0700 neillmassello DeleteThis @earthlink.net (Neill Massello) wrote:

NM> Ted Zlatanov <tzz DeleteThis @lifelogs.com> wrote:
>> That's not theft, though it does possibly infringe copyrights.

NM> Correct, but not really relevant to Bill's main point that what Art does

I don't like it when copyright infringement is called theft. I think it
shows a particular point of view that's unfortunately pervasive in the
USA and Europe today, and is misguided. It misses the point of the
copyright system; for digital content with marginal production costs
near zero and infinite elasticity (both of which make the copyright
infringement entirely unlike theft) it's particularly painful to see
this misconception voiced.

If you want to continue this discussion, I encourage you to at least
look at the articles on the topic at http://techdirt.com among others.

Ted
 >> Stay informed about: Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please. 

Ted Zlatanov <tzz DeleteThis @lifelogs.com> wrote:

> I don't like it when copyright infringement is called theft. I think it
> shows a particular point of view that's unfortunately pervasive in the
> USA and Europe today, and is misguided. It misses the point of the
> copyright system; for digital content with marginal production costs
> near zero and infinite elasticity (both of which make the copyright
> infringement entirely unlike theft) it's particularly painful to see
> this misconception voiced.

I agree with you that inaccurate and provocative terms like "theft"
should be kept out of discussions of intellectual property. I made a
similar argument in alt.internet.wireless that it wasn't helpful to
introduce concepts and terms (such as "trespass") from the world of
tangible or real property into discussions about wireless networking.
It's just that if you object every time you see something like this on
Usenet, you won't get much sleep.
 >> Stay informed about: Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please. 

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 01:45:21 -0500 "Bill Kearney" <wkearney99.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote:

BK> It's certainly THEFT OF SERVICE. You're providing a copy of content that
BK> wouldn't otherwise be available without having paid for the service. You're,
BK> in essense, stealing it. Dodge all you like but it certainly won't justify
BK> the crime.

Theft of service would be watching the channel for free. Copyright
infringement is making an unauthorized copy of the content, which is
what we're talking about. I am not justifying the (minor, hardly worthy
of the name IMHO) crime, only pointing out that it's not theft of
anything. There is no property involved, only content.

Ted
 >> Stay informed about: Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please. 

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 10:38:53 -0500 "Bill Kearney" <wkearney99 DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

BK> Burning copies of programming obtained from a paid service, and giving said
BK> copies to others as a means to avoid their paying for that service. Fair
BK> use certainly doesn't apply to it.

You're assuming the "others" want the content for free because they
don't want to pay for the service. That's not necessarily true and I
don't think it's relevant either.

Is it illegal, in your opinion, to lend someone a DVD you own?

What about lending them your TiVo with the programs on it?

What about making a tape because they were out of town and missed the
show, which they would have seen at home otherwise?

Is it illegal for them to watch a show through your window, from outside
your house? What about place-shifting devices like the Slingbox?

A lot of issues in this discussion are not black and white.

Ted
 >> Stay informed about: Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please. 

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:28:26 -0600, Ted Zlatanov <tzz.TakeThisOut@lifelogs.com>
wrote:
I have opinions on the points you raise....
>On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 10:38:53 -0500 "Bill Kearney" <wkearney99.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>BK> Burning copies of programming obtained from a paid service, and giving said
>BK> copies to others as a means to avoid their paying for that service. Fair
>BK> use certainly doesn't apply to it.
>
>You're assuming the "others" want the content for free because they
>don't want to pay for the service. That's not necessarily true and I
>don't think it's relevant either.
>
>Is it illegal, in your opinion, to lend someone a DVD you own?
>
No
>What about lending them your TiVo with the programs on it?
>
No
>What about making a tape because they were out of town and missed the
>show, which they would have seen at home otherwise?
>
Yes
>Is it illegal for them to watch a show through your window, from outside
>your house? What about place-shifting devices like the Slingbox?
>
No
>A lot of issues in this discussion are not black and white.
>
>Ted

Well, they seem pretty obvious to me. I wouldn't characterise them as
to color, but the legality seems clear. What is it about these points
that seem unclear to you?

--
Charlie Hoffpauir
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/
 >> Stay informed about: Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please. 

> Well, they seem pretty obvious to me. I wouldn't characterise them as
> to color, but the legality seems clear. What is it about these points
> that seem unclear to you?

I agree Charlie. While some folks might "want" it otherwise, the law doesn't
support stealing content, nor should it.
 >> Stay informed about: Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please. 

> I don't like it when copyright infringement is called theft.

Yet there it is.
 >> Stay informed about: Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please. 

On 2008-02-16, Bill Kearney <wkearney99 DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I don't like it when copyright infringement is called theft.
>
> Yet there it is.

Abuse of language is common and has various motivations.

If copyright infringement penalties were brought in line
with penalties for actual theft, and other real property
concepts were also instituted then the conflation would
be less egregious.

--
Apple: because TRANS.TBL is an mp3 file. It really is! |||
/ | \

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
 >> Stay informed about: Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please. 

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 10:29:14 -0600, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2008-02-16, Bill Kearney <wkearney99 DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> I don't like it when copyright infringement is called theft.
>>
>> Yet there it is.
>
> Abuse of language is common and has various motivations.
>
> If copyright infringement penalties were brought in line with
> penalties for actual theft, and other real property concepts were also
> instituted then the conflation would be less egregious.

Can't do that -- a lot of definitions of "theft" and "stealing" are
based on "depriving another of his property without permission". If
there's no "depriving" happening, then things get really ... funny.

--
2. My ventilation ducts will be too small to crawl through.
--Peter Anspach's list of things to do as an Evil Overlord
 >> Stay informed about: Ultimate Tivo Unit - When? Thoughts please.