Forum - View topic

NEWS: Japan Strengthens Copyright Laws for Downloading

samuelp wrote:

What about encryption?

Rightly or wrongly, encryption has its own legal restrictions in a number of countries (including the UK). And what's to stop ISPs forbidding encryption as part of their service contract and cutting off the service of anybody using it?

In these types of situations, wouldn't it be best to make a new law rather than bend the rules of an existing one?

Quote:

You don't just write something and its copyrighted.

I'm sorry, but I stopped reading once I saw this. My friend, this is how ignorance is spread. Your statement is inaccurate, and the opposite is most certainly true and law.

Even the very forum post you submitted is copyright to you. ANN even addresses this with their copyright statement. Read it when you get a chance.

Simple, because all e-commerce relies on encryption. Everytime you pay for something with a credit card online, or use e-banking, or use the internet for almost anything involving personal data, you are using an encrypted connection.

You can't accuse someone of something illegal just because they're using encryption, but you can't prove what they are doing is illegal in the first place unless you break the encryption (which is itself illegal without a warrant).

I guess in terms of being able to slap the word "copyright" on anything then I can't argue that and you are correct. No matter what kind of alternatives I present it doesn't change the notation that technically you can put the copyright label on forum quotes and rants. Pardon my ignorance when being realistic over the issues of copyright infringement outside what can or can't be applied under the term of fair use clause or what can be used as evidence in copyright cases or to legally justify notation of infringement or legimate ownership when the content amounts to forum quotes or flames or is only part of a much grander or extensive work of literary nature. It was ignorant of me to include all that other stuff as well when considering what it takes to uphold a copyright that doesn't have a legal document claiming those rights and using that the determine my use of the word "copyright" and how it is applied. WOW. what. a. fool. I. am. how. ignorant. eh?

The_X_box_360 wrote:

Encryption doesn't mask your connection activity. In other words, the IPs you connect to, as well as the ones connecting to you, are still visible, along with the flow and volume of data between you're connections. That's essentially what this is all about. I imagine that it would only ever take a few minutes of research to identify the IPs and determine if you're likely file-sharing or not, encryptions be damned.

Whoah-ho-ho there. Encryption prevents you from knowing what is being transferred, only that something has probably (deliberate sending of bogus data) been transferred Once you start equating "high bandwidth usage" with "sharing of copyrighted files", the internet is essentially dead.

I agree with you, Nomeru.

Even if this was influenced by the MPAA and RIAA in Japan, it won't make any difference. And the most dangerous thing about it, is that it only stands to hurt the anime industry more, which is already struggling.

-It's the number, flow and volume of IP connections you're making that can easily identify individuals who are making excessive use of file-sharing applications. So easy, in fact, that your activity is clearly differentiated from that of someone who's playing a massive online game.

Like the US "wild wild west" of the 19th Century, that was like the internet is today, it was eventually tamed and regulated under the rule of law

Mohawk52 wrote:

Like the US "wild wild west" of the 19th Century, that was like the internet is today, it was eventually tamed and regulated under the rule of law

How is the internet a "lawless" place now? It is currently subject to laws and regulations in every country right this very minute. This is the same drivel that religious groups like the Australian Christian Lobby and the censorware vendors are screaming about in an attempt to knacker law abiding Australians in using the internet (our souls have to be saved from all the "filth" pouring into Australian homes and software manufacturers need to make a profit by censoring us. Just ask Senator Stephen Conroy). The lack of enforcement of these laws does not mean the laws do not exist.

edzieba wrote:

The_X_box_360 wrote: Encryption doesn't mask your connection activity. In other words, the IPs you connect to, as well as the ones connecting to you, are still visible, along with the flow and volume of data between you're connections. That's essentially what this is all about. I imagine that it would only ever take a few minutes of research to identify the IPs and determine if you're likely file-sharing or not, encryptions be damned. Whoah-ho-ho there. Encryption prevents you from knowing what is being transferred, only that something has probably (deliberate sending of bogus data) been transferred Once you start equating "high bandwidth usage" with "sharing of copyrighted files", the internet is essentially dead.

I'll say, again, encryption doesn't mask your connection activity. I've said nothing that suggests that "high bandwidth usage" would be equated with "sharing of copyrighted files".

-It's the number, flow and volume of IP connections you're making that can easily identify individuals who are making excessive use of file-sharing applications. So easy, in fact, that your activity is clearly differentiated from that of someone who's playing a massive online game.
-From there, it can be as simple as an inobtrusive (to "general" consumer confidence as a whole) alteration to your connection, firewalling off all incoming torrent peer connections; or it could be as harsh as a connection termination.

It doesn't have to have anything to do with "high bandwidth usage".

On Friday, the Japanese parliament passed an amendment that will make it illegal to knowingly download copyrighted material without authorization for the first time

The Freetards are just complaining because the source for their raw anime for their fansubs might go away. I used to download to preview anime but since I found legal streaming it's introduced me to some shows I would have never seen. I'd only been watching the popular stuff. Legal streams are great and I wish they would stream more big name stuff, but after the One Piece incident I don't know how many companies would want to.

I suppose you see the irony of writing a whole rant over how some laws apply too broadly and need to be changed, then miss entirely the point about how broadly current copyright law applies and that IT may need to be changed..