Has Copyright owners actions affected your choice?

[bpaw]

------
Bpaw wrote: As for your example of going to a downloaders house and helping yourself, can an innocent person who paid off GEIL do the same at your house? They could come in and take your beers, TV and BlueRay player. No, I would think not. You want it one way only.


AGAIN please say who is innocent.
--------

The Judge!!!!!!!!

------
I would rather make the example by going to a downloaders house, help myself to his beers and put my feet up on his coffee table and watch a movie on his plasma TV and blu ray player then pick up his car keys and drive away in his car after to make a point that if you expect my stuff for free how would you feel if I did the same thing to you by taking for free what you have?
-------

That is retribution.

----------
Once again, as HHJ Birss QC pointed out, the court needs to consider the impact of the letter of claim upon ordinary consumers who may not have access to specialised legal advice, who may be innocent of what is alleged against them and who may be embarrassed and/or distressed by being alleged to have been involved in filesharing involving pornography.
----------

The above is an absolute example of why GEIL are doing what they are doing. Being accused of downloading pronography is embarrassing / distressing to people who don't do it. This is what I beleive the Judge is hinting at for the reason why innocent people will pay up despite being innocent.

[one eyed jack]

I would rather make the example by going to a downloaders house, help myself to his beers and put my feet up on his coffee table and watch a movie on his plasma TV and blu ray player then pick up his car keys and drive away in his car after to make a point that if you expect my stuff for free how would you feel if I did the same thing to you by taking for free what you have?
-------

That is retribution.


NO! Thats how would you feel if I took the same liberties with your things as you do with mine.

Ive used this analogy about a similar thing in the past and this is the first time Ive had the word restribution said about it

Its more like do unto those as you would have done unto you. How would you feel. Search on these forums for piracy and where I have posted you wil see I have not said this the first time



This is what I believe the Judge is hinting at for the reason why innocent people will pay up despite being innocent.


This he may well be but if I was asked to pay up a huge amount of money for something I havent done I'd be kicking up all kinds of hell. It doesnt matter about what it is.

Its like getting a parket ticket in the post. I accept Im guilty because the police claim they have proof but I pay up because I assume I am guilty because they said so backed up with proof they never show. maybe the police speed cameras are flawed too? You never know


The above is an absolute example of why GEIL are doing what they are doing. Being accused of downloading pronography is embarrassing / distressing to people who don't do it. This is what I beleive the Judge is hinting at for the reason why innocent people will pay up despite being innocent.

Thats a very big possibility but if I was to don my judges wig for a second you still refer to people being innocent based on your knowledge the monitoring system is flawed...But how do you know they are innocent? i reckon guilty people who get caught will say the same thing.

I feel I am innocent of all my speeding tickets too

[one eyed jack]

If the judge deems everyone innocent then does this not make the whole operation illegal???

[bpaw]

OK OEJ, I do accept your analogy in its context it was meant.

I mentioned retribution in the sense that you wish people who did download your material to pay up. A "fair cop guv" sense. I see that, and I brought up the retribution aspect not in a bad sense, but to clarify your belief and what GEIL are doing.

Such belief must be clarified. The monitoring software which I believe is flawed only "proves" a computer is sharing content. The theory is that the content could be shared to many. The "proof" does not prove that. The parking ticket analogy you bring up does not "prove" that the offender is a serial parking ticket offender. It proves just one infringement.

OEJ Said: "This he may well be but if I was asked to pay up a huge amount of money for something I havent done I'd be kicking up all kinds of hell. It doesnt matter about what it is."

You ask me to see your point of view about piracy. If you look through this thread, you will see that I do. You also see that I have said that I actively protect copyright holders in the work that I do. I ask you to not see the work that you do as perfectly acceptable to everybody in any relationship and walk of life. There are people who see pornography as objectionable. There are people who will receive the letter who have partners, and the mere fact that this letter has appeared on their doormat will cause major trauma. Fair do if they are guilty, but if they are innocent it can cause a major relationship problem. The affects can become far more serious than financial.

OEJ Said: "Thats a very big possibility but if I was to don my judges wig for a second you still refer to people being innocent based on your knowledge the monitoring system is flawed...But how do you know they are innocent? i reckon guilty people who get caught will say the same thing.

I feel I am innocent of all my speeding tickets too"

And OEJ Said: "If the judge deems everyone innocent then does this not make the whole operation illegal???"

Ahem! Come on OEJ! Let us see the situation as it really is. It was an NPO application. The Court case is not a trial to prove anybody's guilt. The Judge weighed up the evidence before him, and cited previous Court cases. He made his judgement.

You have a conviction. You have a belief. You also have your association with GEIL. GEIL went to Court and the Judge made comments about innocent people and low income people. Why did he do that? Simple. He has taken on board other real cases involving ACS:Law. Much of what he says is "may be" and "many". He does not say "everyone". I do not say "everyone".

You must know that I received a letter from ACS:Law. You may know that I am on the spreadsheet from their leaked emails, so the world "knows" that I downloaded pornography. The real truth is I didn't, but the trauma it provided is so wrong that I am here now debating with you.

Let us be straight with each other. Each of us comes in to this debate with a true belief. I know too well that producers like you are suffering from piracy. I would not bring up the original question I asked unless I had a true belief in what I say. I have said previously that the idea of what GEIL are doing is a correct course of action in principle. The MAJOR trouble is that they chose the duo of Alireza Torabi and Clem Vogler to pursue their goals. This duo were responsible for many "humorous" comments from Judges in Court when they represented ACS:Law.

At least I took the trouble to read the GEIL NPO judgement. At least I took the trouble to read the judgements relating to ACS:Law. At least I took the trouble to read the leaked emails from ACS:Law (Considering that I am in there!). I do my research.

I also do my research regarding Mr Becker:

I see that he said he spoken to "other producers" when he said that things have slowed down as regards piracy. Were you one of them?

He also decides that popular tube sites who stream copyright material for free are worth speaking to rather than taking action against. Two faced?

Explain to me why GEIL are OK to send letters out to downloaders, and get "in bed" with tube sites.

A conviction should be backed up through a truly moral action.

Also, if you ask me again about who ?Is innocent?, just look at the NPO judgement and look at the words from the Judge that I have already quoted. I will not listen to you asking who is innocent, I will look at the Judges words.

[one eyed jack]

BPAW: Why did he do that? Simple. He has taken on board other real cases involving ACS:Law. Much of what he says is "may be" and "many". He does not say "everyone". I do not say "everyone".


Indeed this was something I weighed up when it was presented to me. As I have stated, i dont want anyone going down suffering for something they havent done but as yet I am not confronted with this crisis of morals as nothing like this has come to my attention as yet. I will take you at your word of your innocence on this as you are doing what I would probably do if I was in your situation but the problem I face is letting an opportunity like this go by sending out a signal that I am ot interested in doing anyhting about it. I have said to other producers that if they chose to stand against this then by all means do so but bear in mind it confuses those reading these posts that you are somehow ok with it as you want people to see your stuff for free

This is a self inflicting injury to moan about the daming effects of freeloading but then encourage it. So I say to producers, make up you rmind which side of the fence you are on with this or just stop banging on about people nicking your stuff when you deride the methods at your disposal to deal with it.

I need to real with real world examples of these "innocents" you allege would suffer relationship issues as a direct result of this.


BPAW: I see that he said he spoken to "other producers" when he said that things have slowed down as regards piracy. Were you one of them?


I couldnt rightly say I noticed if it has but if it has it would be a direct benefit from the knowledge of this schemes existence so that would be a positive thing.

If this never resulted in any fines but my memberships increased directly because of it then it would a be a positive result of being part of this. If other producers suffered and was not part of this then I think it would be evident that it worked but seeing that the business model of websites have taken a knock in lost revenue in the past two years it is hard to tell right now.

Then again the market for websites being highly competitive on many levels quality, vfm, power plays could have a lot to do with it as well


I made my views very clear with regards the phase on version of ACS Law and didnt like the mercenary approach to that. You say its not any different but I am told it is and the courts involvement lends credibility to what I am told. I also have every faith in Julian not resulting in the same fate as ACS Law because of the courts intervention on this

[bpaw]

I like your frankness OEJ, like I always have.

I have seen your conviction as regards the welfare of actresses health, and the outcome of what happened. It is a true testimony of your belief and your ability to convince a community with different views to come together and do something that is right.

I see your viewpoints here the same in what you believe.

I apologise if I made you feel that you are on trial. You are not. You are associated with GEIL, and you are the only person involved who is prepared to come out and debate it.

That is a truly good attitude to take.

[one eyed jack]

I'll take that compliment Bpaw. I dont get them much so thanks for that

I'm also quick to admit I dont always get it right all the time. After all, I am a mere human just being

[bpaw]

LOL!

Just to clarify. It is within the period from the NPO in March last year that I did my research on all producers involved with GEIL! I don't want you thinking that I am some pervert! BIG LOL!!!!!!!!!

I think there is always respect for your apposition regardless of subject. That comes through honest debate.

[one eyed jack]

I don't want you thinking that I am some pervert!


Ha ha I didnt entertain that thought for a second I agree with you on the respect for the opposition. Theres nothing wrong with debating our differences. Im sure you and I could sup a beer quite happily even if we disagree on things. It is that which makes us human.

Credit due where its deserved of course.

Hats off to you sir !happy!

[bpaw]

OEJ Said: "Ha ha I didnt entertain that thought for a second I agree with you on the respect for the opposition. Theres nothing wrong with debating our differences. Im sure you and I could sup a beer quite happily even if we disagree on things. It is that which makes us human.

Credit due where its deserved of course.

Hats off to you sir !happy!"

The compliment is reciprocated.

Just promise me an open mind when it comes to the eventualities.