Facebook user going to prison for uploading bootleg copy of Deadpool

[sac39507]

The movie was lame. I'd rather go to prison for something worthwhile

 

[sac39507]

Can someone please explain to me why this movie is so highly rated? I watched it and it was an ok movie but people talk about it like it's the holy grail. Did I miss something? I just don't get it.

I agree. It was a dumb movie I thought. I hate superhero movies, transformers movies, and Fast and Furious movies. They all use the special effects to make up for the lack of acting talent and intelligent storylines. I hate cheesy lines and actors who always try to be funny. Ryan Reynolds and the Rock are the two worst actors ever. Are they serious action actors or comedians? I really don't know. If I want to hear funny lines, I'll go watch a comedy. Are these people free to say whatever they want in their roles or what? So lame.

 

[gnpfrslo]

Corporate apologist have no shame.

 

[user108]

People who bash their partners/wives etc do not get this serious jail sentence, however someone denying more profit to the already rich must burn...

 

[Darth Shiv]

So if I burn down your business or cause you to lose your job, you can't sue me for lost income because it's all potential future money you never had in the first place?

False equivalence.

 

[m3tavision]

This kid needs better Parents...!

 

[LNCPapa]

If you steal someone's unlocked car you will still go to jail. To think that it's okay to "take" because it wasn't protected enough is lunacy... and criminal.

 

[Darth Shiv]

If you steal someone's unlocked car you will still go to jail. To think that it's okay to "take" because it wasn't protected enough is lunacy... and criminal.

Except in this case, the actual equivalent argument is copying the design using your own materials so the person with the "unlocked car" still actually has their "unlocked car".

English please people - copying is not the same as stealing. Stealing means you no longer have it which is clearly not the case here.

As per Oxford dictionary definition:

Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.

 

[LNCPapa]

I can't wait till someone "copies" your identity.

 

[MaikuTech]

I can't wait till someone "copies" your identity.

Heh that will be a real nightmare if that happens, identity theft can be very hard to bounce back from.

 

[Darth Shiv]

I can't wait till someone "copies" your identity.

Is a movie private or confidential? How do you make money if you keep it to yourself? Comparing an identity which is "private" (but let's be honest - the SSN + Name + DOB system is atrocious) to media which copies are licensed?

 

[LNCPapa]

I was simply making a point that if you want to argue semantics about the word "steal" instead of what it means in the real world then that can be a different argument, but it detracts from this debate. My point is and has been that it's not for everyone else to decide when the studio has made "enough" money on this movie. I'm all for them making as much as they can from this movie as long as the movie itself is not hurting anyone and is not required to save a life or even improve one's well being. You would probably be upset if you had a friend over and they made a video of everything in your home then turned around and posted that video on YouTube for the world to see... I know I would.

 

[Darth Shiv]

It may be semantics but the MPAA etc have used an emotive argument to try justify their overreach to the public (people like you who vote) when it comes to copyright by incorrectly using the word "steal". The biggest problem I have is that the punishments for copyright infringement are disproportionate to the crime and it's only because Hollywood/ the studios have lots of money.

I would say their strategy has worked - the US Government strong arms many countries to comply to US laws and ignore domestic laws. That is straight out corruption.

 

[Bluescreendeath]

You would not be sued for loss of income - you would go to jail for arson. Copyright infringement is not theft in the truest sense of the word (more akin to selling fake Gucci bags than theft) and the actual damage done is very hard to quantify. But without copyright - then the effect on the creative industries could ultimately be a problem (without a different funding model) . So these "halo" cases which always get bigger exposure than the actual crime deserves are all a part of the merry modern dance of corporation controlled crony capitalism.

Actually, loss of income lawsuits are a very real thing.

 

[Bluescreendeath]

It may be semantics but the MPAA etc have used an emotive argument to try justify their overreach to the public (people like you who vote) when it comes to copyright by incorrectly using the word "steal". The biggest problem I have is that the punishments for copyright infringement are disproportionate to the crime and it's only because Hollywood/ the studios have lots of money.

I would say their strategy has worked - the US Government strong arms many countries to comply to US laws and ignore domestic laws. That is straight out corruption.

It's copying that destroys the value of their product. It's similar to forging fake money. Sure, you're not "stealing" someone else's money, but if everyone was allowed to create money, then the money would become worthless through skyrocketing inflation.

You're not "stealing," but you are making something worth less by disrupting supply and demand.

 

[LNCPapa]

The biggest problem I have is that the punishments for copyright infringement are disproportionate to the crime and it's only because Hollywood/ the studios have lots of money

I strongly agree with this part of your last post - the punishment is typically disproportionate. I know it is intended to create enough fear to dissuade from doing it in the first place, but occasionally I think the people handing out the verdict forget that part.