[LINK] The US and THEM of P2P

[Tom Koltai]

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Howard [mailto:scott at doc.net.au] 
Sent: Thursday, 5 March 2009 7:20 AM
To: Tom Koltai
Cc: link at anu.edu.au
Subject: Re: [LINK] The US and THEM of P2P


>On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Tom Koltai <tomk at unwired.com.au> wrote:

>As evidenced by the story from Colin Jones of the Adelaide Advertiser
it
>would appear that there is a law for us - and a law for them.

>http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23495134-5006787,00.
h
tml

>HUNDREDS of police officers across South Australia caught using their
>work computers to illegally copy movie DVDs will escape prosecution.


>So that's the "law for them" - if you're making a comparison you'll
need an example of a "law of us".

>Can you name a single case of anyone being charged for copying DVDs for
what I can only but presume is personal use, 
>even if it did take place in a workplace?

>In this case, I think the law, and it's enforcement, for "us" is
exactly the same as the law, and it's enforcement, for >"them".

Well actually,  I can, but before I do, could you please distinguish for
me the difference between ripping a DVD onto your computer and sharing
it with other police officers or downloading the same dvd - already
ripped from a file server using kazaa for example ?

POLICE seized around 10000 counterfeit DVD's
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,,24184898-2862,00.html
Police seize DVDs worth $19,000
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/18904,police-seize-dvds-worth-19000.aspx
Raids uncover 8,000 pirated DVDs
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/04/02/2206097.htm 
POLICE ACTION ACROSS TWO STATES FOILS MOVIE PIRATES
http://www.afact.org.au/pressreleases/AFACT_Media_Release_20070619.doc

>Can you name a single case of anyone being charged for copying DVDs for
what I can only but presume is personal use, 
>even if it did take place in a workplace?

The article didn't state single use. It stated :Police sources have told
The Advertiser an official investigation, which could lead to criminal
charges, will not be conducted because of the large number of police
officers involved in copying DVDs.

In other words - lots. Assume large number to be be 50 and dvds per
month = 1 each then that results in a DVD "personal use" operation for
private use of 600 dvd's per year. Hardly a case of "single use personal
copying".

Your argument is akin to stating - let him off judge, he's not a serial
killer, he only shot one innocent person.

>In this case, I think the law, and it's enforcement, for "us" is
exactly the same as the law, and it's enforcement, for >"them".

Having had to show my purchase receipt at customs for four DVD titles
that I purchased in the USA (or have them seized - had I not been able
to show the receipt) and having observed closely the application for and
delivery of a number of Anton Pillar orders in the late eighties in
Victoria against intelectual property theft on behalf of Autocad, I can
very definitely say - no the law is not the same for everyone.


Tom



_______________________________________
No viruses found in this outgoing message
Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.6.4
http://www.iolo.com