- cross-posted to:
- piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- cross-posted to:
- piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
You must log in or register to comment.
IP is only an issue when not swallowed by LLMs. We want action taken to protect the IP of writers, artists and consumers but alas big corpos aren’t losing money there. Selective application of IP protection deems the regime as inappropriate and unenforceable (unless someone with paedophile connections is losing money).
I see our tax dollars are hard at work.
I feel SO protected 😒
Jokes on them, I didn’t even watch highlights of the WC on any platform.
Further, I hate sportsball and humanity in general! I survive on rainwater and berries, and my cave (for now) is rent-free.
Which site was that? IP should in general be protected: Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states: “Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary, or artistic production of which he is the author.” I own quite a bit of IP myself, and some try to steal it, very cumbersome.
Stealing intellectual property is only a problem because your survival is not guaranteed without it. If you could live a comfortable life no matter what, it would be much better for the whole of humanity if your current IP was simply available to everyone.
Just imagine if all the duplicate work from competition immediately disappeared and instead everyone in whatever field just shared their insights and built on each other’s work.
Of course, that only works once everyone’s survival is not dependent on this IP concept anymore. But it should be clear that in an utopian society, IP is just stupid.
It would make it pretty hard to do some kinds of research for a living, though. You’d basically get a small number of open source nerds and their free time fully in charge of, like, curing cancer. There are third options, but that’s why IP was invented in the first place.
Stealing intellectual property is…
… a nonsense loaded phrase made up by the copyright cartel in order to dishonestly frame the debate.
In reality, copyright is not ‘property’ and cannot be ‘stolen’ to begin with.
Meh, the article mostly argues semantics. Sure “intellectual property” is a loaded phrase, but what is meant by the layperson is just “I made it, I should profit from it”, i.e. copyright. We’re not talking about massive corporations here and hindering right-to-repair, I’m talking to a guy who made something useful (likely software or music or whatever creative) and wants to sell it.
I agree that talking about it vaguely is not super useful, but this is just a small casual discussion forum, not some legal debate.
So a company taking anything you’ve created (posts, memes, videos, art, etc.), and using it to train their AI is perfectly okay, yes?
This is disingenious.
First of all, IP can’t be stolen. In order for something to be stolen, it needs to be taken from you, and you need to be left with nothing. Your TV can be stolen. A copy of something you made is a copy, and you still have the original. You’re not left with nothing.
Second, AI companies are using your IP to train their AIs, which they then sell and make huge profits, both by selling it back to you and by trying to replace you with it. That is, imo, the worst part about them. Pirating something without any intention to profit from it is not comparable to what AI companies are doing, by far.
Third, this is about football. It’s already stupid that a company can hold IP rights over a sport event. They’re not even the players who actually “create” the content.
It was probably a streaming site that was illegally streaming world cup matches.
I hate fifa like the next gal, but it’s their IP.
it’s weird when it comes to broadcasting though. they send the match footage to everyone over the air, but only those who pay get the decryption key. so is the footage the ip, or the key? furthermore, if i pay for the key, then let a friend watch at my place, is that ip theft? if i go to their place and re-stream the footage from my house so we can watch from there, is that ip theft? if i leave but they keep watching, is that ip theft? if they get a friend to come over and watch, is that ip theft?
the definition seems to be that hosting a restreaming service (“pirate iptv”) is ip theft, but narrowing it down isn’t really possible.
there was a study here a few years ago by a digital rights company that estimated how much iptv piracy cost the rightsholders. using their numbers everyone in the country would have had to pay 200€ a month for tv for the result to make sense.
so yeah ip theft isn’t fun, but when the big corporations constantly lie about it and go after people who isn’t even aware they’re doing it i tend to side with the consumer.
There will be laws for this in your country, but they’re country specific.
For your cases:
- The key is a technical protective measure. It’s not the IP, but circumventing it except to legally access my legally accessibly content is not allowed.
- Private showings are fine, even with a certain amount of non-personal-aquaintances in the mix.
- Re-streaming is tricky and depends on how you handle it on a technical level. Re-streaming without circumventing protective measures for your personal use is usually fine.
- You can temporarily leave during a private showing, it’s still legally a private showing.
The big difference with a streaming site is that it is automatically a public showing because they do not know who accesses the site (and in fact would not want to know, lest they open those viewers up to legality issues again).
Again, those are for my country. It differs everywhere.
i’m thinking back to the blu-ray decryption key thing, where a key was spread in the form of a flag and therefore didn’t count as copyrighted material. of course live broadcasts use rotating keys anyway so it’s not possible to do that.
a streaming site can be a private thing if it is gated by some kind of login, so that’s also a way of getting around the issue.
what complicates it even more is that we here are even allowed to save media from any source for personal use, and we pay a “private copying tax” on all storage media purchases because of that. RAM included. what constitutes “personal use” is also a bit diffuse but seems to hinge on whether it’s for profit.
so technically, as long as it touches a storage device, and as long as it’s not publically available (e.g. passworded or something), and i am not charging for it, it should be entirely legal here.
Yeah… Let’s reward criminal enterprises by having them keep their loot. Trump will be proud 🥲
Property is theft, including intellectual property.
And yet, doesn’t everyone have the rights to the fruit of their own labor?
The sport streams the site in question pirated were ABSOLUTELY not the fruit of the rights-holders labor, nor do any of the profits go to the ones laboring.
You COULD argue that the clubs get paid for the rights and they pay those who labor, but that’s bullshit since both the clubs and the other rights-holders are mostly owned and funded by American and Middle Eastern billionaires who haven’t performed honest labor in their lives and other shareholders that haven’t performed any of the labor being exploited either.
