DMCA regulations


Recommended Posts

If people love the show then they shouldnt download it and show support for the creators by buying it when it comes out, forget that whimpy "im only previewing it before i buy it" crap. Preview it if they release video clips on the website.

586271551[/snapback]

Correction. They may download it siince they are buying it.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/349660-dmca-regulations/
Share on other sites

Incorrect. Even owning a legal copy of the disc does not grant one permission to obtain it, also, via illegal means.

586271667[/snapback]

Are you implying that using Bittorrent is illegal? It isn't illegal at all. If I own a copy of the disc I fail to see how downloading it equates to obtaining it illegally

Owning a license to watch a movie also allows you the opporunity to back it up (without violating any laws/agreements). Downloading it is the only method those without the required hardware to back-up can obtain a back up.

Just because you own a DVD doesn't mean you can walk into a store and steal a 2nd copy.

586271673[/snapback]

Woah! That's totally out of context. Downloading (does not equal) stealing...

You purchase a license to view a movie when 'purchasing a movie'. That license is completely valid regardless of the source of media (a physcial DVD vs data digitally stored on pcs).

If I own it, I can download it.[/size]

Edited by joekr

so i can make copies for myself legally....can rip it for personal use on my own computer legally...but if i own it and don't want to go through the trouble of ripping it i can't download it and have the exact same files i would have if i ripeed it myself....

how does that make any sense?

Just because you own a DVD doesn't mean you can walk into a store and steal a 2nd copy.

586271673[/snapback]

Completely different thing. If you walk into the store and take a copy, you are depriving that store from selling said copy. By downloading it, you are dowloading a digital copy so no property is lost. When you buy a DVD, you are buying the media it is on and a licence to use the content on it. Since you already have a license to use the content on the DVD, there is nothing wrong with downloading it for storage on your PC IMO (and yes, I know it's technically illegal to do so but really, who cares? No one is losing ANYTHING and the company got thier money from you).

Nothing wrong (at least morally, in my opinion) with downloading for previewing purposes. It's not like this movie took tons of money and work to make anyway, unlike some movies in theaters (100+ million). Anyway, if I download something and it's not good, then I'm very happy not to have payed for it. If it is good enough, I will purchase it.

Technically it's illegal to download as it's not even been released onto the shelves YET therefor obtaining it via Bittorrent or P2P networks means it's illegal.

If you don't think so then that's upto yourself and those wanting to download it, but I think people should respect the rules of the site and not discuss certain issues based on warez.

If you're downloading it then do so but you know don't make a meal out of something. I think it's sad it's gotten out, But still there'll be many people who'll buy it just because they love the show.

BTW I'm not a Family Guy fan but... BUT! I would like to see this movie, it may sway me, anything is worth a watch! :yes:

Incorrect. Even owning a legal copy of the disc does not grant one permission to obtain it, also, via illegal means.

586271667[/snapback]

Are you serious? So you're saying that if I go the store and buy a CD, then go online and download that same CD, that I can't do that?

Christ. Boggles the mind that something that is so obviously OK would be illegal. Assuming I'm understanding this correctly, might as well make food illegal too. Makes just as much sense, the way I see it.

EDIT: In regards to the FG movie, as much as I would love to see it, and as many ways I have of obtaining it (just like everybody else), I may have to actually pass on downloading it. I mean, the show already got cancelled a few times. I don't want to do anything that might cause it to get cancelled again.

Are you serious? So you're saying that if I go the store and buy a CD, then go online and download that same CD, that I can't do that?

Christ. Boggles the mind that something that is so obviously OK would be illegal. Assuming I'm understanding this correctly, might as well make food illegal too. Makes just as much sense, the way I see it.

586271732[/snapback]

I believe bangbang is misinformed on that particular issue.

I believe bangbang is misinformed on that particular issue.

586271742[/snapback]

Um, no I'm not. You can have a subscription to medication, but buying it from a guy on the street is still illegal. In the ned, only authorized dealers have the right to distribute copyrighted material. The people you download the files from are not authorizzed to distribute the material since they neither own the copyrights nor the permission to distribute the material. Downloading from these distributors includes you in the crime. Read the DMCA and standard copyright laws.

I believe bangbang is misinformed on that particular issue.

586271742[/snapback]

I believe you are misinformed. That would mean if you buy an album on iTunes you can walk into Best Buy and grab yourself a copy. No, that's stealing. Instead, you can make a copy of what you own, not take someone elses copy.

I believe you are misinformed. That would mean if you buy an album on iTunes you can walk into Best Buy and grab yourself a copy. No, that's stealing. Instead, you can make a copy of what you own, not take someone elses copy.

586271766[/snapback]

no....stealing the actual album from a store is stealing someone's chance to own the license to that music, it is stealing the album...how is downloading an album you already own stealing anything....you are twisting it around in a way that makes no sense....when you purchase a cd you purchase the license to listen to that music...therefore you can have copies for personal use....how is me downloading the CD after i already own it any different than me ripping it myself, or copying it onto another CD (or tape)?

the same arguments were made when cassette tapes came out...the industry was complaing that people would just trade copies of albums and that it would hurt album sales.... :blink:

that was a stupid argument, and so is this....if you own a cd/DVD/VHS/cassette you are allowed to have copies for personal use....it only becomes illegal when you try to profit off of them....

Edited by Am_I_Evil
I believe you are misinformed. That would mean if you buy an album on iTunes you can walk into Best Buy and grab yourself a copy. No, that's stealing. Instead, you can make a copy of what you own, not take someone elses copy.

586271766[/snapback]

That isn't the same thing at all. You are suggesting that a license to listen to 'album x' allows you to walk into a store and steal the CD it was pressed on.

And bangbang, right in the middle of the copyright section of the DMCA is the following

`? OTHER RIGHTS, ETC., NOT AFFECTED- (1) Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title.

Backing-up anything one holds a license to would fall under fair use. If one's[bonly>[/b]> method to back something up is to download it, that falls under fair use.

That isn't the same thing at all.  You are suggesting that a license to listen to 'album x'  allows you to walk into a store and steal the CD it was pressed on.

And bangbang, right in the middle of the copyright section of the DMCA is the following

Backing-up anything one holds a license to would fall under fair use.  If one's only method to back something up is to download it, that falls under fair use.

586271806[/snapback]

The DMCA comes into play, though. Technically, the software used to rip DVD's has be deemed illegal (remember dvdcopyx?). Also, as soon as the user distributes the file and you download it, the crime moves past the DMCA and onto federal copyright grounds. Also, remember, unless you're a leech, you do upload while downloading meaning you are distributing the copyrighted works also.

*Yawn.* Do people actually still debate piracy as if there's some all-powerful solution? Piracy will never go away as long as games, movies, music, etc. are so overpriced. I don't know about anyone else, but I for one am sick of reading pointless debates over people who support this or oppose that. The problem in question in this thread is not piracy, but rather the Neowin ToS. No one here can to crap to stop piracy, so the bickering is rather pointless. The talk of how to obtain warez and what not is another story, as it violates Neowin's rules. Piracy will live on forever until the companies see how they're screwing themselves out of sales by insanely overpriced goods, some of which aren't worth the medium they're printed on... so please Neowin, I beg you.. stop the arguements and please let's all get along?

STEWIE FOR GOVERNOR!

That isn't the same thing at all.  You are suggesting that a license to listen to 'album x'  allows you to walk into a store and steal the CD it was pressed on.

And bangbang, right in the middle of the copyright section of the DMCA is the following

Backing-up anything one holds a license to would fall under fair use.  If one's only method to back something up is to download it, that falls under fair use.

586271806[/snapback]

Downloading isn't making a backup. You're obtaining a copy from another user. Your license entitles you to a backup of your copy, not someone else's.

Besides, no one owns this DVD yet. It's all on pre-order. They have not been given their discs and have not obtained their license to use the disc for personal exhibitions. No one has the legal right to own this except the copyright holder and anyone they've given license to hold a copy thus far.

Besides, no one owns this DVD yet. It's all on pre-order. They have not been given their discs and have not obtained their license to use the disc for personal exhibitions. No one has the legal right to own this except the copyright holder and anyone they've given license to hold a copy thus far.

Agreed... I'm not debating that fact at all. I'm asserting that downloading a video isn't illegal in 100% of all situations.

Downloading isn't making a backup. You're obtaining a copy from another user. Your license entitles you to a backup of your copy, not someone else's.

That is totally up for interpretation, as neither the DMCA nor any other copyright documents clearly state that as a fact. If you suggest otherwise, I'd like to see a link or some other source.

Agreed... I'm not debating that fact at all.? I'm asserting that downloading a videoisn't> illegal in 100% of all situations.

That is totally up for interpretation, as neither the DMCA nor any other copyright documents clearly state that as a fact.? If you suggest otherwise, I'd like to see a link or some other source.

586272328[/snapback]

it's not up for interpretation.

you know, you could make a good lawyer...but not in america. I just read all of your posts and i think a lot of your arrogance about downloading is because you're in canada where these laws are slowly taking place there.

My question to you is, if you can afford 3 dvd's, why can't you afford a dvd burner? You can easily get them for around $40 now. Or how can you download dvd's and yet not be able to back them up? I bet you burn the download dvd's to a dvd, but wait a minute....you can't copy your own dvd's?:o:o

Also, like a few people have said, as far as torrents go, you ARE uploading to another user that may or may not be buying the dvd/cd/etc, therefore you are not just downloading. You help other people illegaly obtain the product. The product you buy in the store is not what you download, and again, just like someone else said, you can't go to the store and take a cd you bought from iTunes and vice versa. If it's not in the DMCA, I'm sure it in some sort of agreement, just like what Valve do. You can download Half-Life 2 online OR you can get the retail dvd or cd at the storeBUT NOT BOTHb>. If you loose the copy of your cd-key on your retail disc, you're screwed. When you re-install you will need a new key. At a business stance I would have to say what they say and that's "tough ****."

If you want to get your "backup" go for it man, but the rules at neowin state you can't talk about warez. So come on, for the better of this community, leave it off the damn forums. I'm sick of it, and I hope there are more people like me that want it gone. Use a torrent forum if you want to talk about torrent-warez.

Edited by Meshuggah
it's not up for interpretation.

you know, you could make a good lawyer...but not in america. I just read all of your posts and i think a lot of your arrogance about downloading is because you're in canada where these laws are slowly taking place there.

My question to you is, if you can afford 3 dvd's, why can't you afford a dvd burner? You can easily get them for around $40 now. Or how can you download dvd's and yet not be able to back them up? I bet you burn the download dvd's to a dvd, but wait a minute....you can't copy your own dvd's?  :o

Also, like a few people have said, as far as torrents go, you ARE uploading to another user that may or may not be buying the dvd/cd/etc, therefore you are not just downloading. You help other people illegaly obtain the product. The product you buy in the store is not what you download, and again, just like someone else said, you can't go to the store and take a cd you bought from iTunes and vice versa. If it's not in the DMCA, I'm sure it in some sort of agreement, just like what Valve do. You can download Half-Life 2 online OR you can get the retail dvd or cd at the store. BUT NOT BOTH. If you loose the copy of your cd-key on your retail disc, you're screwed. When you re-install you will need a new key. At a business stance I would have to say what they say and that's "tough ****."

If you want to get your "backup" go for it man, but the rules at neowin state you can't talk about warez. So come on, for the better of this community, leave it off the damn forums. I'm sick of it, and I hope there are more people like me that want it gone. Use a torrent forum if you want to talk about torrent-warez.

586272486[/snapback]

Of course the legality of downloading material you hold a license for is open for interpretation. Nowhere in the DMCA does it specifically state or suggest that one is violating the terms of the act by downloading a movie (iso) that one already owns on DVD. Perhaps you should google DMCA and read it. If it's not written in the act, not you nor anyone from Fat City can tell me otherwise.

Once again, when one purchases a movie from the local store, one is purchasing a license to view the material and the disc the material is pressed on. In other words, at the point of purchase (time of transaction), one has a license to view the movie. Under fair use, one is entitled to make backup copies of the movie whether it be on a hdd (iso) or a dvd (read DVD CCA Surrenders in Burner DVD Descrambling Case). That being said, one (downloader) is not in violation of any copyright laws by downloading a movie he/she already owns on dvd.

It is absurd that some of you are suggesting then that this is no different than purchasing music online via itunes and then walking into a shop and pocketing that same CD. When purchasing licenses to listen to music via itunes, you are not purchasing an accompanying CD, case, or cover art. What makes you think, then, that you can take the CD when clearly you never paid for any physical component of the 'CD' at all... just the license (read: rights) to listen to it. What would happen if your ipod broke and you had to replace your unit? You wouldn't have to pay for all those songs again... you'd be allowed to download them because you already paid for a license to listen to that music.

Likewise, since you mentioned Steam and HL2, I should also mention that those who purchased the retail box can and are entitled to download the game via Steam as well... and obviously no one is asserting that those who purchased online via steam have the right to walk into Wal-Mart and snatch a copy of the game... that would be absurd.

Your attempts to squash my point by asserting, "it's not up for interpretation", are in vein. I have a firm grasp of my rights as a consumer, license holder, and Canadian citizen. Better luck trying to manipulate the next trick.

Edited by joekr
Um, no I'm not. You can have a subscription to medication, but buying it from a guy on the street is still illegal. In the ned, only authorized dealers have the right to distribute copyrighted material. The people you download the files from are not authorizzed to distribute the material since they neither own the copyrights nor the permission to distribute the material. Downloading from these distributors includes you in the crime. Read the DMCA and standard copyright laws.

586271762[/snapback]

Ahhhh, so what you are saying is that you are not allowed to buy something which is second-hand, as they have no right to sell it?

Damn thats f*cked up. :rofl:

? dont know......i have already read the 6 pages.....still dont know whatz the problem.....i have a dvdrw machine i record directly from tv, not just FG anything i like to....for example ihave Shrek2, i bought it when in it came out and i already recorde it when hbo air it few months ago...why? cause i have a 4 year old son....i also bought the incredibles, some games,etc and i already make not just 1 2 copies of each cuase as i said i have a 4 year old son and i aint gonna give him the originals and when i cant copy i just download it......there are some good arguments here but overall is BS....i saw when VCR came to public and saw the same arguments and still there are VCR's today, there no difference and dont give the crap of the digital copy most people dont give a damn about it as long as is watchable......there is no difference if i copy from tv, from the video store or a friend that bought a dvd and copy for me, that what friends will do........long live the torrents

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Google adds built-in computer control to Gemini 3.5 flash by Karthik Mudaliar Google has added Computer Use as a built-in tool in Gemini 3.5 Flash, giving developers a single model that can reason about a task and operate graphical interfaces across browsers, mobile devices, and desktop environments. The feature is available through the Gemini API and Google’s Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform, although it remains a preview feature for now. Computer Use enables an AI agent to examine screenshots and return actions such as mouse clicks, scrolling, and keyboard input. A developer’s application must execute those actions, capture the resulting screen, and send it back to Gemini, creating a continuous loop until the task is completed. Google says the integration can be used for activities including repetitive form filling, application testing, research across multiple websites, and longer enterprise workflows. Gemini 3.5 Flash can work with browser, mobile, and desktop environments, whereas Google’s earlier standalone Computer Use model was primarily positioned around browser interaction. The main change is consolidation. Computer control was previously offered through the separate Gemini 2.5 Computer Use preview model. As Neowin reported when that model was introduced, it was designed to interpret a visual interface and generate actions without requiring a website-specific API. Google later brought Computer Use to preview versions of Gemini 3 Pro and Gemini 3 Flash in January 2026. The latest release now incorporates the tool into the stable Gemini 3.5 Flash model rather than requiring developers to select a specialized model solely for interface automation. Gemini 3.5 Flash itself was announced in May as Google’s latest fast model for coding and multi-step agent workflows. It supports a one-million-token input context window and up to 65,000 output tokens, along with adjustable thinking levels that let developers trade additional reasoning for lower latency and cost. Google also added that Gemini 3.5 Flash received targeted adversarial training for computer-use scenarios. The company is also offering safeguards that can require user confirmation before sensitive or irreversible actions and automatically stop a workflow when suspected prompt injection is detected. Its developer documentation describes configurable protections for areas such as financial transactions and changes to sensitive records. Google isn't the first to bring Computer Use to its platform. Anthropic has made computer control available through Claude, while OpenAI has continued improving computer-use performance in its recent models. Microsoft has also applied the concept to business workflows, including a Computer Use capability for the Researcher agent in Microsoft 365 Copilot.
    • After I installed KB5095093, the volume on my ARM laptop won't go above 20%. It's stuck on the hearing protection level, which is pretty much useless if you want to listen to anything. I rolled back.
    • Amazon Prime Day slashes Samsung's newest Galaxy Watch Ultra by 45 percent by Karthik Mudaliar Samsung’s flagship Android smartwatch has received one of its steepest Prime Day cuts. Amazon has dropped the 2025 Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra in Titanium Blue to $357.24, saving buyers around $292 from its $649.99 list price. That's a 45 percent discount (purchase link below). The 47mm Galaxy Watch Ultra uses a titanium casing and a 1.5-inch Super AMOLED display with a resolution of 480 x 480 and peak brightness of 3,000 nits. It includes LTE connectivity, Bluetooth 5.3, Wi-Fi, NFC, and dual-frequency L1+L5 GPS for more accurate outdoor route tracking. The 2025 model has 64GB of storage, a 590mAh battery, sapphire crystal glass, 10ATM water resistance, IP68 protection, and MIL-STD-810H durability testing. Its health and fitness tools include heart rate monitoring, sleep coaching, Energy Score, Running Coach, body composition analysis, temperature sensing, and ECG support, where available. This model is best suited to Android users who regularly run, hike, cycle, or train outdoors and want cellular access without carrying a phone. The larger battery, rugged construction, bright display, and dedicated Quick Button also make it a stronger option than Samsung’s regular Galaxy Watch models for extended workouts and demanding environments. Grab the Titanium Blue Galaxy Watch Ultra before the Prime Day price resets: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025) [Sold and Shipped by Amazon] Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Google begins rolling out its post-Epic Play Store billing model next week by Karthik Mudaliar Google has confirmed that its redesigned Play Store billing and fee structure will take effect on June 30, 2026, in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Economic Area. The changes will let eligible developers offer their own payment systems or send users to an external website for purchases, while separating Google’s platform service fee from the cost of using Google Play Billing. The rollout puts concrete dates and detailed rate cards behind the broader Android policy overhaul Google announced in March. That announcement followed a proposed settlement with Epic Games intended to resolve their long-running disputes over app distribution and payments, although the U.S. portion of the agreement still requires court approval. Under the new billing choice program, developers selling digital content or services can display an alternative payment option alongside Google Play Billing. They may also direct users to their own websites to complete a purchase. Developers can use Google’s standard payment-choice screen or design one that complies with the company’s user-interface rules. Choosing another payment processor does not eliminate Google’s cut altogether. The company will continue charging a service fee for transactions associated with apps distributed through Google Play, regardless of whether payment is handled by Google, an alternative provider, or a developer’s website. Google argues that this fee covers the value and infrastructure provided by Android and the Play Store. For developers earning up to $1 million annually, the service fee will generally be 10 percent. That rate also applies to auto-renewing subscriptions. When Google Play Billing is used in the U.S., U.K., or EEA, Google will add a separate 5 percent billing fee, and developers processing payments elsewhere will not pay that additional charge. This means Google’s familiar flat 30 percent commission is disappearing, but developers will not necessarily see a dramatic reduction on every transaction. An in-app purchase from an existing user processed through Google Play Billing can still reach a combined 30 percent. The biggest savings are likely to come from subscriptions, smaller developers covered by the $1 million tier, and companies able to move customers to their own payment infrastructure. Google is also offering lower rates through its Apps Experience and revamped Games Level Up programs. Apps and games that satisfy the company’s requirements can qualify for 15 percent service fees on new-install transactions and 20 percent on existing-install transactions. The criteria include performance and reliability standards, support for additional Android device categories, and selected platform features. Those program rates are scheduled to become available in the initial markets and Australia on September 30. For consumers, the immediate effect will depend on whether developers adopt alternative payments and pass any savings on through lower prices. For developers, however, June 30 begins a more flexible but considerably more complicated Play Store economy in which distribution, billing, install dates, revenue thresholds, and program participation can each affect Google’s final cut. Google is also separately developing a Registered App Stores program designed to simplify the installation of qualifying third-party stores. That initiative is expected to arrive with a major Android release later in 2026 and will launch outside the U.S. first. Google says the rest of the world will receive the changes by September 30, 2027, although billing rates for markets outside the US, UK, and EEA have not yet been announced.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
    • One Year In
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      464
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      81
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!