[SATLUG] Man arrested for copying his own CD's

Hector Bojorquez hector.bojorquez at gmail.com
Sat Jan 5 14:05:40 CST 2008


ACLU !!!

Atheistic
Communist
Liberal
UnAmericans!!!!

just kidding...



On Jan 5, 2008 1:20 PM, Ernest De Leon <edeleonjr at gmail.com> wrote:

> You know, John, I don't want to say that 'I hate to agree with you,' but I
> like to think that America would stand up and try to stop continuing down
> the wrong path.  Unfortunately, thus far we've let everything get out of
> hand.  If the next president doesn't start to fix all of these problems, I
> think we will need another organization like the ACLU that specifically
> targets the erosion of our freedom.  It's definitely a sad situation.
>
> E
>
> On Jan 5, 2008 11:06 AM, John Chalinder <argiod at bresnan.net> wrote:
>
> > So, George Orwell hit it on the head with his novel "1984" when he
> > described
> > the 'Though Police'. The idea of busting people for 'intent' began with
> > the
> > 60's drug wars. Back then, the police had to prove intent when dealing
> > with
> > possible paraphernalia. Now things are turned around and it is up to us
> to
> > prove lack of intent. Sigh, I remember the days when one was innocent
> > until
> > proven guilty. We've certainly gone 180 degrees from those days. Now,
> you
> > can
> > be put away unless and until you can prove your innocence... which, if
> > they
> > have determined you're associated with terrorism, will be near
> impossible
> > as
> > you will be taken away to a place that is not signatory to the Geneva
> > Conventions, with no lawyer, no communications, etc. I can almost feel
> > Hitler
> > grinning from his grave... You may say I'm just being paranoid; but ask
> > any
> > Jew who survived the holocaust, and see if they don't think we're
> heading
> > down
> > the same road to Hell. Only now, you don't have to be a Jew to be taken;
> > today's only true crime is poverty. If you ain't got the money, then
> > you're
> > guilty by default.
> >
> > Of course, this is just my opinion; I could be wrong.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 23:52:11 -0600
> >  herb cee <hc at lookcee.com> wrote:
> > > John Chalinder wrote:
> > >> Even so:
> > >>
> > >> "The Copyright Office can neither determine if a certain use may be
> > >> considered "fair" nor advise on possible copyright violations. If
> > >> there is any doubt, it is advisable to consult an attorney."
> > >>
> > >> Which only means that it comes down to whether you can afford a good
> > >> enough lawyer to get a ruling in your favor over the high priced
> fancy
> > >> corporate lawyers; and, sometimes, whether you have the patience and
> > >> financial 'staying power' to battle it out in court with a
> corporation
> > >> that can well afford to tie the case up in court for years. Most drop
> > >> out due to lack of ability to afford the legal fees for a protracted
> > >> fight.
> > >>
> > >> "The law is a matter of interpretation. And, of course, it is the
> > >> King's men doing the interpreting." Robin of Locksley
> > >
> > > Yes John, that is the opening that RIAA uses in nearly 30000 *lawsuits
> > >filed* so far ... they will settle for $2500 on most since you are
> > correct
> > >the average employed worker would be advised by his attorney to pay it
> > and
> > >would try to get a payment plan set up. because you will constantly be
> > hauled
> > >in to respond to motions that drive the billing up several times a
> year.
> > >
> > > It does need to be decided if copyright extends beyond the actual
> > selling of
> > >the data. as it stands you can be convicted for intent not actual, the
> > >precedent is most dangerous. jail for maybe thinking about an action.
> > >
> > > herb
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 21:21:45 -0600
> > >> herb cee <hc at lookcee.com> wrote:
> > >>> Brian Lewis wrote:
> > >>>> Actually, "fair use" hasn't been determined by a court yet, so we
> > >>>> can only speculate as to what fair use is.
> > >>>
> > >>> Your statement is false according to the .gov site this law is
> > codified
> > >>>
> > >>> Although fair use was not mentioned in the previous copyright law,
> > >>> the doctrine has developed through a substantial number of court
> > >>> decisions over the years. This doctrine has been codified in section
> > >>> 107 of the copyright law.
> > >>> http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
> > >>>
> > >>> Would you please site your source?
> > >
> > > --
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > SATLUG mailing list
> > > SATLUG at satlug.org
> > > http://alamo.satlug.org/mailman/listinfo/satlug to unsubscribe
> > > Powered by Rackspace (www.rackspace.com)
> >
> > --
> > _______________________________________________
> > SATLUG mailing list
> > SATLUG at satlug.org
> > http://alamo.satlug.org/mailman/listinfo/satlug to unsubscribe
> > Powered by Rackspace (www.rackspace.com)
> >
>
>
>
> --
> They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
> deserve neither liberty nor safety.  - A common 18th Century sentiment
> voiced by Benjamin Franklin
>
> Join the Ron Paul Revolution - Taking America Back
> http://www.prezronpaul.com
>  --
> _______________________________________________
> SATLUG mailing list
> SATLUG at satlug.org
> http://alamo.satlug.org/mailman/listinfo/satlug to unsubscribe
> Powered by Rackspace (www.rackspace.com)
>


More information about the SATLUG mailing list