POLL: Are downloaded TV shows warez ?

[adam]

you only have the right to view it once.

This is untrue, at least in Canada. Nowhere in copyright law does it say how many times you can watch a time shifted show.

And for most countries, including Canada, you won't find anything about time-shifting contained anywhere in copyright laws at all. That's because for most countries with this right, it came via the acts created by the Berne Convention. In the US the concept came via case-law.

YES time-shifting only allows a 1 time later viewing, that's where the name comes from. You are shifting your viewing to a later period. If you allow someone to watch it multiple times than it is not time-shifting it is a backup.

Unless I am mistaken, Canada allows you to make backups of the intellectual property you purchase, including television broadcasts. You're right, there is no limit to the number of times you can watch these backups. But this has nothing to do with time-shifting. Its an entirely different right based on entirely different principles.

Most countries aren't as leniant as Canada when it comes to consumer's rights in the copyrighted materials they buy. I do believe that part of that tariff you pay on certain media goes towards the copyright holders in certain industries to offset the lost profits due to backups.

[nick101181]

I'm not even sure what is happening here. One of the main reasons anybody with a video capture card bought one is to record stuff for personal viewing. It wasn't too long ago when getting help capping a tv show and how-to use of filters ,etc etc. was ok to be discussed. Pretty soon this site is gonna go to nothing but "how do i make a dvd/vcd/svcd/divx/xvid of my home movies from hi-8/mini dv". So soon everything may eventually end up getting labelled as "Warez". The reason tv companies don't want ppl getting shows from p2p programs is because they want to release the show on dvd. Now some ppl use p2p programs to see these shows since they live in other countries and the shows may never make it to their shores. I think we should be allowed to discuss capping tv shows and also to get help with it. think about the ppl who signed up with this site years ago. Just about everyone learned what they know today by capturing as a hobby. I wouldn't say I know everything but I have tons and tons of vast knowledge that I've picked up or have been taught from this site over the last couple of years. I come here sometimes on a daily basis and just read posts for hours and hours and do tests and follow everyone's tips and suggestions. I'm proud to know all of the capturing/authoring know-how I've picked up. Besides not everyone owns a camcorder so if tv/movies/ and pretty much anything else with a copyright can't be discussed what's left? Not everyone here is big bad Mr. Bootlegger who makes seasons of shows on dvd or vcd or whatever and turns a profit on them. Some of us are just too damn broke to ever be able to buy tv shows on dvd so they wouldn't be getting out money either way. I think tv shows should not be entitled warez. I thought this whole point of copyright and not being able to record and save was settled back in the 80's when companies went to courts complaining about vcr manufactures? Yes we pretty much live in a world were soon everything will be illegal, Hey I might even get fined if I scratch my nuts more than twice in one day. My opinon is if you got the money to go out and spend 40 to 100 bucks everytime a show comes out then fine go get it cause you're gonna have good extras and a nice shiny package and all that will be better than any dvd-r you could make, but if you never have the money and you want to keep for your own use then i see no problem with it. It's just like Anthony Keides said one time on mtv..." if you don't ever have the money to buy one of our cd's, then fine download own music cause we're artists and we want to get our music out to the ppl, but if you have money and just don't want to buy it ,then f*ck you, go buy it." I don't know I'm just rabbling on.

[adam]

I'm not sure what the problem you are having is, nick101181. The right to time-shift was around long before this site was started, and neither that right nor this site's policy regarding it hasn't ever changed. You have a right to time-shift, and under certain circumstances the right to format shift. In some countries your rights are even greater and you have the right to do full backups. Therefore we openly discuss methods of tv-capturing and VHS and DVD backup and conversion methods. There is nothing illegal or immoral about discussing it. Its up to the individual user to use this information for legal purposes.

There is nothing illegal or immoral about using a source downloaded off of any P2P service. Unless the poster gives us any reason to believe otherwise, we should all assume the material is in the public domain, and that is the policy of this forum. There is no more leniant policy which could possibly be used without subjecting this site to direct legal action.

If you browse around the forums I think you will see that nothing is ever labeled as warez unless it explicitly qualifies.

[nick101181]

OK thank you for clearing this up and btw I live in canada now where they pretty much piss on copyright laws and allow you to do whatever

[paulw]

I download lots of TV programs from news groups that are shown in the US. I am a SciFi fan and unfortunatly the county I live in both free to air and pay TV treat SciFi like it dosen't exist. The cash cow as far as they are concerned is reality shows. If the SciFi is shown here it is years behind.

So I have no problems in doing this as they have already been shown in the US or UK.

Movies are a nother story. I would rather go and see it in a theater or buy the DVD than download it..

[mastersmurfie]

I think the whole point of jimmalenko's initial post is summed up here (if I'm wrong, just say so...) :

In no way am I having a go at you, mastersmurfie. Just my opinions...

if I can record a TV show on my VCR when it is aired, but I miss it and then find it downloadable, whats the difference? I understand the "warez" rules, and adhere to them. However...it *could* go both ways...

I would call that bad luck. You were quite able to timeshift by using your VCR but didn't.

I post saying that I have just captured an episode of <insert TV show here> and am having trouble with it (converting, burning, whatever) because the format that I captured it in was "non-compliant" or whatever might be the problem...I might get all sorts of help...

I agree totally. Capturing from VHS yourself is just format-shifting after time-shifting IMO. I don't see anything wrong with that.

If I post saying that I have just downloaded this episode of <insert TV show here> from <insert P2P network here> and am having trouble with it, I would get jumped on for asking about warez...

This is what I'm talking about !

I think downloaded copyrighted movie = download copyrighted TV show.

The AUP does not specifically mention TV shows as being warez. Thanks to Adam for categorically defining them as such. Any chance we could get the AUP modded to reflect this or is it open to interpretation ?

Now that I've had time to actually read all the info here, and actually watch a few "broadcast" TV shows...I understand what he means. Downloading a TV show, whether it be "last night's" episode of Survivor, or an old episode of the Andy Griffith show, is copyrighted material.

Therefore, in my (new) opinion, it is no different than downloading a copy of Scooby Doo 2 or saying that you have a RENTED copy of <insert titile here> and are trying to work with it.

This, I think, is covered in the AUP:

Warez rules
What is warez? Obtained IP (intellectual property: software/music/movies) either through download, serial, or crack in a manner that either explicitly or implied breaks the copyright or license for that IP.

Do NOT give warez / Do NOT link to warez
Distributing warez. This includes linking to warez either directly or to crack or serial sites. Offering warez in any fashion including PM or e-mail is against forum policy.

Do NOT ask for warez
Asking for warez. In any fashion this is unacceptable including but not limited to PM or e-mail requests or information on what p-2-p network has copies.

Do NOT provide information on how to obtain warez
Providing information on how to obtain warez.

Do NOT advocate warez
Advocate warez. Recommending the use of warez.

I believe this is also covered in the AUP here:

Fair use / Backup
When you own the media, they are the rights you get automatically DESPITE what content providers or laywers might tell you. These rights are fully supported by the crew at VCDhelp and are the basis for most of the site. These fair use rights evaporate when you sell the media in question.

Backup
You have the right to make A backup of your media. You can back up as much or as little as you wish.

Format shifting
You have the right to convert your media to another format.

Time shifting
You have the right to time shift your legitimately received cable, tv or satellite signal for viewing at a later time

Notice the parts in BOLD there...

It pretty much all boils down to HOW you ask/say/express what you want to ask/say/express.


just a thought

mastersmurfie

[realmexican]

Adam wrote:
"The right to time-shift was around long before this site was started, and neither that right nor this site's policy regarding it hasn't ever changed. You have a right to time-shift, and under certain circumstances the right to format shift. In some countries your rights are even greater and you have the right to do full backups. Therefore we openly discuss methods of tv-capturing and VHS and DVD backup and conversion methods. There is nothing illegal or immoral about discussing it. Its up to the individual user to use this information for legal purposes. "
mmm... What about time-shifting from foreign transmissions? What's the legality/illegality of it? I mean, the case-law definition ine the US of svae it once to view it once later is still applicabble?
What about the other way around? Time shifting in a foreign country from a signal generated here in (Put the name of your country here).

[jimmalenko]

...it is no different than downloading a copy of Scooby Doo 2 or saying that you have a RENTED copy of <insert titile here> and are trying to work with it.

Got it.

[adam]

realmexican: If you are receiving the signal than most likely it is being broadcast from somewhere in your own country, in which case your laws would apply. If you are able to pick up broadcasts from other countries, then that raises a conflict of laws question. My guess is your country's laws would still apply.

You'd have to look to the laws of your country to know where you stand on time-shifting. If your country accepted the Berne Treaty then your rights in regards to time-shifting are probably very similar to that of the US. If you have a legal right to watch the transmission (you aren't breaking any encryption) then you most likely can time-shift the material regardless of where the signal is coming from. But again, you'd have to check your own laws.

[crane9999]

What about shows like "Jay Leno" (or other game-show which are not buyable thru any legal media) for example? are they considered Illegal when you download them via a p2p network?

[rhegedus]

What about shows like "Jay Leno"?

Is there a codec good enought to compress his chin to a more reasonable size?

[crane9999]

Is there a codec good enought to compress his chin to a more reasonable size?

I only used his name since I don't know any other american show. I meant if it would be okay if i download a show like this..

[tatty]

That's easy ! Anyone who even watches, let alone records, "reality" (?) shows should be prosecuted on principle. Death by a thousand cuts would be preferable but I suppose I'd have to settle for handing out a hefty fine. If no one watched this *@$# then maybe we would have more decent TV to argue over.

Sorry - off-topic but irresistable.

[Craig Tucker]

Since when was Jay Leno a reality show, I thought it was a chat show.

[Capmaster]

Since when was Jay Leno a reality show, I thought it was a chat show.

It's definitely not a reality show. Jay Leno passes himself off as being funny. I miss Johnny

[teegee420]

Since when was Jay Leno a reality show, I thought it was a chat show.

It's definitely not a reality show. Jay Leno passes himself off as being funny. I miss Johnny

Hear, hear. Leno's about as funny as cancer.

[Gazorgan]

So the only 'legit' site offering full movie downloads you can keep forever is a porn site. I guess my case stands then? Your not allowed to re-distributre them anyway, so as I maintained, there are no legitimate sites offering public domain 700/1400/2100 MB AVI's?

[rhegedus]

I'm not entirely sure about the 'full movie' downloads either. What was on that link was a load of links to other sites with nothing more than clips on them.

Is there a site that has full movie downloads (i.e. 1Gb) of the current top 10 box office stuff without a time lock? No, didn't think so....

[RabidDog]

Can someone post the address of a non-porn movie site that rents/sells movies for download? Ie one where you pay for the movie?

Also my take on this is simple, downloading Tv shows is breaking copyright ergo it is warez. regardless of whether you are likely to ever get the show aired in your country, regardless of how out of date the shows are. Timeshifting is oK, but recent court rulings will NOT allow new tivos to be built that incorporate the ad-skip feature..so when you time-shift you MUST include the ads...obviously unenforceable today but who knows about the future.

[Capmaster]

so when you time-shift you MUST include the ads...obviously unenforceable today but who knows about the future.

This supports my argument that the ads are the drivers with TV shows. The more exposure they get, the happier the sponsors are and, for that reason, the producers/owners/ .....

[jimmalenko]

So the only 'legit' site offering full movie downloads you can keep forever is a porn site

Not that that's a bad thing or anything

[Craig Tucker]

so when you time-shift you MUST include the ads...obviously unenforceable today but who knows about the future.

This supports my argument that the ads are the drivers with TV shows. The more exposure they get, the happier the sponsors are and, for that reason, the producers/owners/ .....

Not with the BBC . I hate adverts and will change channel to avoid watching them.

[StarofRadiance]

I can see how you can come up with examples where you could make the moral argument. But under the law, the answer is still no. The critical distinction that most people overlook is that when you buy a DVD, VHS, or subscribe to a channel you never obtain any rights in the material itself.

You are absolutely correct. There are many examples of this. Years ago, my bandmates and I purchased a painting with intention of using it for an album cover. We couldn't. The painting was copyrighted by the author (I will not mention names here), and the only license we had was to display the painting, not to reproduce it.

[aamir12345678]

Just a quick question. If I record with my vcr a show, movie, etc. off of my tv from cable that I paid for, but I do not record commercials and then have that tape to watch as I please later. Is this legal? It is uncut now, almost exactly like an uncut version you would find for (let's just say) $14.95 at the store. Further, if I have a Dvd-recorder and record that movie, show, etc. without the commercials, I now have an uncut DVD of that tv show, movie, etc. that I would find in the store for $19.95. Is this legal? Now, we shift to downloaded copies. It is the same thing. Is this legal?

Yes, it is probably illegal to download because it is not the exact viewing of it that you could have watched on your tv via the cable that you paid for.

Now, having said that, let me remind you of something, gentlemen.
We know that the speed limit is either 60 mph or 70 mph on freeways, but no one goes that speed. They always go just a little bit above, most officers included. THAT SPEED LIMIT WAS MEANT FOR SAFETY AND NOTHING ELSE! Accidents are not caused by this, they are caused by people going 100 mph, drunk driving, etc. IF YOU FORGET THE PURPOSE OF LAWS, THE LAWS WILL BECOME USELESS!. Rather than making the internet a cleaner place by ridding it of free and unlimited access to stolen merchandise, you will be wasting your time cracking down on what comes down to nothing but a technicality. I will always hold the opinion that if an officer gives a ticket for going 63 mph in a 60 mph zone, he is an *******.

Further, how could you say that copyright laws are not meant to prevent anti-theft. They always have been, they are now, and they always will be.

I am not arguing against the law, but threads like this are a waste of time.
Enforcing laws takes wisdom, not zeal.

[Supreme2k]

So does that mean that the box that I tick when installing software on my PC (I agree to......) is null and void because I did not know of it when I bought the software?

But you willingly ticked the box. When you buy a video (or anything from a simple purchase), you are only really "agreeing" to pay for the item. Though the copyright and so forth is still valid, it's just that most people don't read the microscopic contract. When you check the box that says "I agree...", that is your signature to the agreement.

Regarding the speed limit thing, in California, we give about a 10-15% margin for speeding (coming from an ex-cop). The judge would laugh at us (probably more like yell at us) if we brought in 67mph in a 65mph zone perps

[rhegedus]

So does that mean that the box that I tick when installing software on my PC (I agree to......) is null and void because I did not know of it when I bought the software?

But you willingly ticked the box. When you buy a video (or anything from a simple purchase), you are only really "agreeing" to pay for the item. Though the copyright and so forth is still valid, it's just that most people don't read the microscopic contract. When you check the box that says "I agree...", that is your signature to the agreement.

Have you ever tried returning software after you've undone the wrapper? There are signs in our stores that clearly state that you can only return software if the wrapper and security seal are intact.

I tick the box and think 'f*ck it, I'll back it up anyway!'.

My point being that we all agree to abide by the rules for the sake of argument but then go and 'bend' them anyway - just like your speeding example.

[andkiich]

I now have an uncut DVD of that tv show, movie, etc. that I would find in the store for $19.95. Is this legal? Now, we shift to downloaded copies. It is the same thing. Is this legal?

Yes, it is probably illegal to download because it is not the exact viewing of it that you could have watched on your tv via the cable that you paid for.

Moreso, I think the issue is that "you" or someone who lives at your residence did not "record" the TV show for purposes of watching it later.

Further, how could you say that copyright laws are not meant to prevent anti-theft. They always have been, they are now, and they always will be.

I think orginally, copyright laws were meant to keep other people from taking credit or using parts of an existing work for their own gain, not to keep people from "pirating"(and I mean that in the more modern definition), downloading the work.[/b]

[medievil]

I think the answer is very, very simple. Anything a person is distributing without permission is warez. Be it tv show, movie, song, etc...
The question of do you have a right to DL it if you own the original doesn't even come into play beacuse the person distributing it 99.9% of the time doesn't have the right to be doing that and thus it is illegal. Recording them for your own personal use,m I see nothign wrong with that...just like making a backup. But distributing them is a whole different egg that I do not agree with. If it is something I really want to see, I make plans to watch or record it when it airs.
Personally I think the Riaa and Mpaa have EVERY right to do what they are starting to do. People have gone completely nuts, no one wants to pay for anything anymore and even get offended if you say they should just buy the movie/albulm/song. Do the Riaa and Mpaa charge more than is fair?? who knows, doesn't every buisness these days?? You don't see people complaining about paying $3 for a Whopper at Burger King, something they will only get to enjoy Once, and only for a fleeting moment. Is $3 to much for a ok sandwich?? In my opinion it most definately is, but you don't see my trying to get them free. It is no different with the Riaa or Mpaa, or even The major networks. They produce a product, consumers enjoy that product. And for that enjoyment they pay the price. Consumers don't have the right to steal the product, just because they think it is overpriced. There is also no Try before you buy law either, Unless the products producers specifically offer a trial period, or taste, so to speak. Consumers do not have the right to take it into their own hands. Their is NO Justification for downloading this type of material.

Someone will prolly bring up the excuse "But the product might be crappy" or some other nonsense reason to try to justify stealing. To that I simply say, grow a set, life isn't always fair. Sometimes you buy a lemon, you know not to buy that brand or from that seller next time.

To anyone who might think of flaming me for my statements. let me ask you this first. Are you flaming because You know I am right or because you are affraid the Riaa or Mpaa might win out and you'll lose your free stuff is my thoughts and attitude about the whole thing was previlant?

[adam]

aamir12345678: Its perfectly legal to only record the movie minus the commercials. Its no different than if you decide you only want to record the last half of the movie. As far as cutting out the commercials after recording, I'd assume that's fine too.

The thing with Tivo is different. With that technology you can completely block out the commercials altogether from the broadcast. I've read some of the commentary on it but not the actual case yet. I think the basic argument is that its just way too pervasive. Its not like time-shifting. You are not copying the broadcast to view at a later date, you are copying the broadcast for the sole purpose of removing the commercials. That is not what the exception is intended for. Time-shifting falls under the Fair Use exceptions, and one of the most important criteria when applying Fair Use is intent.

rhegedus: I hear ya. There is no way to know what is in the license information until you open the package and then its too late to return it. But that's because you have entered into two separate contracts. You entered into one with the store you bought it from and you enter into another with the manufacturer when you choose to agree to the license information. If after opening the box you realize that you cannot agree to the license, your remedy is to return it to the manufacturer. That other contract with the store is over and done with, and they don't have to give you back your money.

Its a matter of practicality. Manufacturers cannot put all of their licensing information on the outside of the box. There's not room as there is, and it would leave no room for the pretty pictures. Most of the licensing information is boilerplate anyway, so even though you don't read it before hand you basically know what it will entail. Also, the burden is on the buyer to investigate if they predict there might be a problem. You can always contact the manufacturer before hand to see what the terms of the license will be.

medievil: I agree 100% with everything you posted. I get a little bit of flaming too whenever I say things like that. I think Canada (for once ) has some real novel legislation. You can't stop digital pirating in the "digital age." Its just too easy to copy things and blame it on high prices or crappy products or "ooh I'm just play-testing it I'll buy it after I beat the game..." So accept that it happens, and allow people reasonable backups. Then subsidize the copyright holders through a minimal tax on those products used for backups, ie VHS tapes, blank media etc... Nobody wins outright, but everybody is at least better off then with an all out war.

[medievil]

So does that mean that the box that I tick when installing software on my PC (I agree to......) is null and void because I did not know of it when I bought the software?

But you willingly ticked the box. When you buy a video (or anything from a simple purchase), you are only really "agreeing" to pay for the item. Though the copyright and so forth is still valid, it's just that most people don't read the microscopic contract. When you check the box that says "I agree...", that is your signature to the agreement.

Have you ever tried returning software after you've undone the wrapper? There are signs in our stores that clearly state that you can only return software if the wrapper and security seal are intact.

I tick the box and think 'f*ck it, I'll back it up anyway!'.

My point being that we all agree to abide by the rules for the sake of argument but then go and 'bend' them anyway - just like your speeding example.

Actually theft is the reason you can't return software anymore. Used to be, back around 96-97, you could return any software you wanted, wasn't any different than returning a ummm, set of shades that were to big for your window. But because People (And truthfully it was mostly the collage aged kids) found out, "hey, i can make a copy of this cool new game and then take it back and get my money back..woohoo" Software started getting returned more and more, untill it got to the poiunt that hey, something is going on, all these returns and there is nothing wrong withthe disks. So stores started adopting the policy of no returns on opened software (Software makers had also by this time refused to pay them back for returns as there was nothing wrong with the disks, thus no warrenty)

But anyway, the above, in my opinion, proves very easily why warez is bad, and the downward spiral it can and is causing.

What ever happened to the old adage that "if I can't afford it then I don't need it" ? People today, it is starting to appear, are becoming nothing more than petty crooks. No integrity at all. I mean look at the poll numbers, more people say it isn't warez to DL a file that is being illegally distributed, then think it is illegal.

Anyway i will shut up, this subject is a passion of mine and I know I'll never change that warez kiddies thought process but I still try...