So does anyone have any clear law that actually states whether or not downloading poor quality, recorded off tv, tv shows is illegal? I've been reading around (even checked the MPAA site-ewwww) and couldn't find anything clear. Everyone has a different opinion. Anyone got some facts?


Thanks guys!

....but try the link http://www.wisegeek.com/is-it-legal-...sion-shows.htm. It seems to have about the best explanation of it. Definitely a hair-splitting topic though.

downloading any copyrighted material without payment in general, is illegal, unless you already own and have purchased a copy.

Or, unless the copyright holder is actually giving away the thing for free.. (Otherwise, downloading virtually anything would be illegal)

If it is shown on broadcast OTA tv, ie - not cable, there is a good chance that the content is avaiable legally from the source (abc, cbs, nbc, fox) on their website.

Not exactly the answer I was hoping for But truth is truth. Hehe, alright, thanks guys! A little clarification never hurts.

If you havnt bought a copy of the show yourself any type of copying is illegal. I think you're tryin to get around the truth.

In the Centre Of The World you mean.. In many countries, it is legal to make private copies of works of art. (It is illegal to share that stuff to a wider audience of course)

well, here's the US Copyright law

I'm too tired to read it

The only confusing thing is that there are no clear leaders of the internet. This can cause many, many problems due to the laws of different countries . There should be one set of laws for the internet throughout the world, I think.

And how would you enforce those laws? You would have to punish people in the real world, not the internet. And in the real world it is the countries' laws that apply .

Say, I have sex with a 16-year-old in a country where this is legal. And then chat on the subject with the same 16-year-old on the internet (where the age limit may be 18 because the US is the Centre Of The World and all). I would be punished for the latter and not the former?

I second Nodsu

IP is really not that tricky, at least from a moral standpoint. Whether it is software, a book, a photo, a video, music, sculpture, a website, etc., the creator/owner of the IP should be compensated properly for the use of his/her work. It is also a no-brainer from a practical standpoint since it is unlikely that we would have so many cool products and/or choices were it not for properly compensating the creators of IP. Of course, the phrase 'the law is an ***' immediately comes to mind when anyone tries to parse the legality of using IP.

I can see this has evolved into a huge discussion. There's a whole realm of law on intellectual and property rights. Of course you need to be a lawyer, and I won't debase myself by becoming one.

Good way to put it!

Nathan's original question doesn't seem to have a clear answer. I mean, you have VCR's, HTPC's, TiVO's, DVR's, Win MCE, etc... that all record tv for viewing later and are sold to the general public (yes I know that you pay for TiVO). So that would lead me to believe that you can record tv as long as you do not share it with anyone with out permission.

But then with US copyright laws who knows?

It seems as if everything contradicts itself, but somehow, they don't .

Who says what is "proper" compensation? Also, copyright does not mean authorship. A company may be making millions, while the original author may have just gotten his wee monthly salary and nothing more.

So, say, there was a TV episode that was broadcast all over the nation and got 100 million "paid" views. How am I hurting the author or the copyright holder if I add 5 "unpaid" views to that? And how is it different from, say, watching cable at my friend's? Sure, he paid for his cable, but I and the other guests didn't. So we are stealing the TV episode, aren't we?!

I think this is an interesting topic. I am not a fan of copyright laws. Though the question does arise how would they make revenues if people are simply going to "steal"? Anyone got a take on this point?

Obviously if there are a million paid users I don't see how companies would be hurt by copyright "infringement", as the profit margins of such companies are as wide as the distance between the earth and the sky.

If people are selling copyright material as if its their own and making money out of it then I would say thats wrong though.

Look at it this way.. What would happen if all the entertainment companies went bankrupt?
Do you think there would be no more music, movies, art, books, games?

Nothing bad would happen. There would be new companies using different principles to operate. There would be thousands of independent artists with fresh ideas getting a chance now that the barrier of uptight corporate producers is gone. There would be artists who actually have control over their work instead of contracts that give everything to the mother company and a tiny percentage to the creative genius.

The marketplace, of course. The original author always has the recourse of making more money by going off on his own. Not likely, of course, because there is much, much more to making money than simply being creative. That is why entire industries have sprung up around creativity to help with boring things like marketing/promotion, accounting, distribution, etc.

Using that logic, I think that we should rob a bank. After all, with all of their trillions of dollars in assets, how will a few hundred thousand taken from them hurt anyone? The cable TV analogy doesn't work, either. Cable providers charge based upon an average viewing household in their market and anticipate (and allow) such viewership.

Stealing is still stealing...