a *sort of* solution to our broadband problem...

Anyways, put up an omni-directional antenna, encrypt and so forth. Then get an uncapped account and sublet it out to 5+ people. If you put a Linux boxen in front of the ADSL line, you can NAT everything, prioritize traffic and set the TTL on the packets so that the ISP will think there is only 1 user on the other side. If you want to improve speeds setup a squid proxy, you can get cache hits for up to 25%-35% of the data. I recently hit a 50% cache rate when I deleted over a gig and had to redownload it all, luckily everything was in the proxy.
 
Sandman30s said:
12. (1) Copyright shall not be infringed by any fair dealing with a literary or musical work — (a) for the purposes of research or private study by, or the personal or private use of, the person using the work;

I don't know about your lawyer or his interpretation of this, but the keywords are 'fair dealing'. If an artist's work is unfairly placed in a public place for free download, it is unfair to the artist for it to be downloaded cos he would be losing sales. The same thing would go for a book - if you spent years writing a book, and someone got hold of your electronic source, and placed it on download.com for all and sundry to download - would it be financially FAIR to you??
Click to expand...

We are not talking morals here, we are talking about the law, which is quite clear.
 
Anyone else here tried joost? I've been using it for a bit and it sucks circa 350mb /hr. Great justification for bigger caps.
 
I am a student, we don't use the internet for illegal downloads, we use LANs and WANs. There are even girls walking around with mobile disk drives to copy their favorite series. Piracy won't be stopped by caps, as long as 1 person has an uncapped account.

Furthermore, no student without a car will go purchase a DVD, if they can watch it on their PCs over the network in their rooms, if DVDs were sold on the network, I would pay for the infrastructure and the release, as disk space is a problem for everyone. Streaming would be better for us.
 
reech said:
Anyone else here tried joost? I've been using it for a bit and it sucks circa 350mb /hr. Great justification for bigger caps.
Click to expand...

I used it before, was very nice. That is what I meant by the previous post, instead of selling us media using DVDs and CDs which are copy protected to such a degree, I need to crack and rip every second one on the Linux PC before I can copy and watch it on the TV in the living room, they can just use this new improved distribution channel.

Piracy has gone down, but so has music sales. People are just fedup. CDs scratch.
 
Peter_J said:
We are not talking morals here, we are talking about the law, which is quite clear.
Click to expand...

This clause is NOT clear, it is open to interpretation. My wife is a lawyer and she said that if you show this to five lawyers, you might get five interpretations. She said under international copyright law (or common law), the copyright vests in the artist once the artist produces the work. An unclear clause in local law does not override international law. You cannot obtain the artist's commercial work for free, unless you get express permission from the artist. So dude, you can continue this argument with the police next time you get stopped at a roadblock... but I will trust a real lawyer's advice.
 
It is an unspoken thing that if you have friends in your vicinity you share the cost IMO. Anybody who can, should get together with neighbours and share the cost of proper Internet. :)
 
Sandman30s said:
She said under international copyright law (or common law), the copyright vests in the artist once the artist produces the work. An unclear clause in local law does not override international law.
Click to expand...

Some lawyer! There is no draconian "International Law" that overrides the laws of a country. There are agreements and conventions that countries are signatories to, to a greater and lesser degree, that require changes to local laws to become enforceable. What you think - that there is some International Copyright Court at The Hague??? LOL!

/me p's on copyright laws anyway!
 
Last edited:
We share our cost. Its the only way we can afford it :/

Good thing its all family even though they stay nextdoor-ish, same property.
 
Joost will eat up bandwidth like crazy as mentioned in a previous post. And the 3G cap doesn't just apply to using your connection on a PC, people have their next gens consoles hooked up as well along with with sharing the connection with other PCs in the house and the neighbors maybe.
 
Sandman30s said:
Why then do the police randomly confiscate mp3 cd's at roadblocks?
Click to expand...

That is an intriguing question. Posession of an mp3 CD is not a criminal offence. There *might* be a case for a CIVIL action, but the only time copyright infringement becomes CRIMINAL is when material is offered for sale or hire. The police would be acting way out of their rights in such an incident. Either that, or they need some new vibes themselves!
 
rwenzori said:
Some lawyer! There is no draconian "International Law" that overrides the laws of a country. There are agreements and conventions that countries are signatories to, to a greater and lesser degree, that require changes to local laws to become enforceable. What you think - that there is some International Copyright Court at The Hague??? LOL!
Click to expand...

I never said any of that. You think if you create music or write a book that you have to go register a copyright? Copyright vests in you the moment your pen hits the page. No local law can override your rights. The keyword is 'unclear' like everything that has been said in this forum. :confused:
 
JBFRobisher said:
That is an intriguing question. Posession of an mp3 CD is not a criminal offence. There *might* be a case for a CIVIL action, but the only time copyright infringement becomes CRIMINAL is when material is offered for sale or hire. The police would be acting way out of their rights in such an incident. Either that, or they need some new vibes themselves!
Click to expand...

Piracy is a criminal offence. The same as walking into a shop and stealing a cd off the shelf. Ever watch the BSA ads? Those who say it is a civil matter are putting their minds at ease trying to reduce the intensity of the offence. Piracy is not the same as speeding.
 
Peter_J said:
It is perfectly legal under our copyright law to download music files for personal and private use.
Click to expand...

This is correct. Anything else said/suggested simply is not.

Also, I can show you how to use 3GB a DAY very legally, never mind a month.
 
Sandman30s said:
Piracy is a criminal offence. The same as walking into a shop and stealing a cd off the shelf. Ever watch the BSA ads? Those who say it is a civil matter are putting their minds at ease trying to reduce the intensity of the offence. Piracy is not the same as speeding.
Click to expand...

Note the difference between downloading for personal use and passing off as real and selling to other people for a profit.
 
Sandman how many websites have you visited that incorporate copyrighted material such as images? These images are cached on your hard drive when you visit the site, they don't magically disappear unless you clear your browser cache. Are you perhaps an internet saint who doesn't have an ounce of copyrighted material on their computer?

I'm not advocating piracy, but what people do with their data allowance is their business. They paid for that, and if within the law, are free to do with it as they see fit and neither you or any ISP may tell them what to do with it. Personally I'd take the word of Peter_J's copyright lawyer (with no offense to your wife).
 
Last edited:
Sandman30s said:
Piracy is a criminal offence. The same as walking into a shop and stealing a cd off the shelf. Ever watch the BSA ads? Those who say it is a civil matter are putting their minds at ease trying to reduce the intensity of the offence. Piracy is not the same as speeding.
Click to expand...

Piracy is, of course, a criminal offence. However it is the crime of robbery on the high seas!

Copyright infringement, however, is ONLY CRIMINAL in the following cases:

27. (1) Any person who at a time when copyright subsists in a work, without the authority of the owner of the copyright—
(a) makes for sale or hire;
(b) sells or lets for hire or by way of trade offers or exposes for sale or hire;
(c) by way of trade exhibits in public;
(d) imports into the Republic otherwise than for his private or domestic use;
(e) distributes for purposes of trade; or
(f) distributes for any other purposes to such an extent that the owner of the copyright is prejudiciallyaffected,articles which he knows to be infringing copies of the work, shall be guilty of an offence.
(2) Any person who at a time when copyright subsists in a work makes or has in his possession a plate knowing
that it is to be used for making infringing copies of the work, shall be guilty of an offence.
(3) Any person who causes a literary or musical work to be performed in public knowing that copyright subsists
in the work and that performance constitutes an infringement of the copyright, shall be guilty of an offence.
(4) Any person who causes a broadcast to be rebroadcast or transmitted in a diffusion service knowing that
copyright subsists in the broadcast and that such rebroadcast or transmission constitutes an infringement of the
copyright, shall be guilty of an offence.
(5) Any person who causes programme-carrying signals to be distributed by a distributor for whom they were
not intended knowing that copyright subsists in the signals and that such distribution constitutes an infringement
of the copyright, shall be guilty of an offence.
(6) A person convicted of an offence under this section shall be liable—
(a) in the case of a first conviction, to a fine not exceeding five thousand rand or to imprisonment for a
period not exceeding three years or to both such fine and such imprisonment, for each article to which
the offence relates;
(b) in any other case, to a fine not exceeding ten thousand rand or to imprisonment for a period not
exceeding five years or to both such fine and such imprisonment, for each article to which the offence
relates.
Click to expand...

So you are quite wrong. All other potential cases are CIVIL. Get your missus to verify this.

Snaffling a CD from a shop is theft, not copyright infringement.
:p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X