10 years in prison for kodi

[Penistone999]

It is always the way that people who commit crimes try to justify them in some way, or another. We can see that clearly on this thread. Plenty of people trying to justify taking something without paying for it.

 

Illegal streaming/ downloading is just that, illegal. Do it if you like, but don't moan if you have to face the consequences.

 

Never downloaded music from a free site then ?

[WasThatWise]

I understood it was illegal to broadcast copyrighted material but not illegal to receive it, has that changed?

Additionally I would guess some of the material is under copyright and some not, how does the end viewer determine which is and which isn't?

[tinfoilhat]

I'd argue that you're wrong. Do you insist visitors to your house pay a fee before you'll put any tunes on?

 

No. Do you steal CDs from supermarkets?

[melthebell]

think its time for this beauty

http://www.musicofsound.co.nz/zimages/piracy02.jpg

[alchresearch]

Total non story.

 

The law change isn't new, here's an article from last June:

 

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07/06/govt_wants_stiffer_copyright_penalty_for_heavy_duty_pirates/

 

And it states:

 

The IPO explained in May that it was intended to deter “egregious” (e.g. industrial scale) infringers, not teenagers in their bedrooms. Criminal cases are hugely expensive, and require the CPS to be convinced there's a crime and a good likelihood of a successful prosecution - and those thresholds haven't changed.

 

Which is why "fully loaded" box sellers are now being caught and prosecuted.

 

Last year the FA and Sky started recruiting legal people via LinkedIn to pursue these people.

 

Quite ironically the article does predict:

 

Still, expect click-baity headlines from tech blogs and wild-flights of paranoia

[geared]

I understood it was illegal to broadcast copyrighted material but not illegal to receive it, has that changed?

 

EU Law has helped muddy the waters abit, pretty much saying it's not illegal to watch the stream but it is to broadcast it.

Out new laws are abit tighter I think, but you're now at odds over what is and what isn't legal.

 

Probably why they're targeting the people selling boxes and running services, much more black and white who's in the wrong there.

[Obelix]

When did plain old dangerous driving come into it?

.

 

The sentencing guidelines on that link cover various offences. There is a special offence of causing death by driving whilst unlicenced it seems that doenst even need to be dangerous and that as you say is a 2 year penalty.

 

---------- Post added 04-05-2017 at 13:52 ----------

 

Legally speaking, yes. It having been broadcast on a channel you can receive doesn't grant you a license to watch it in any other way than when it was broadcast. (Although recording the broadcast is okay).

 

Time shifting via a video recorder is allowed.

 

So do I have to record it myself?

 

What if my wife does it - and then I watch it - is that ok?

 

If so - what if I phone up on holiday and ask my flatmate to record the series that I've found out is on? Surely that's ok?

 

So if someone has recorded it and I could have watched it, then I can download it from him and time shift like that?

 

It's a real minefield in many ways

[L00b]

I'd disagree. The only time I ever download something is when it's content that is free to watch but on a platform I cannot access or as more often happens, I miss the series and it's not on catch-up! For example I torrented The Expanse Series 2. It's on the SyFy channel which I have, but I forgot to record it and missed the first few episodes, it's not on catch-up. Have I broken the law or not?

Technically, only if you torrented with an upload (rather than in leeching-only mode) and/or saved the file(s) anywhere else than in your cache folder.

 

Pragmatically, and equitably, the 'fee' associated with the (real time at broadcast/time shifted through recordal) consumption of that media (The Expanse SE02 - great taste there, btw ) is already included in your SyFy subscription (direct or through Sky or <...>), so no one is the poorer at all in your scenario.

 

The issue would be different (in pragmatic/equitable terms) if you weren't a SyFy subscriber at all.

<...>Which is why "fully loaded" box sellers are now being caught and prosecuted.

 

Last year the FA and Sky started recruiting legal people via LinkedIn to pursue these people.

See my earlier post in here.

 

Sky have (had?) been using Olswang (and they ain't cheap), and they certainly went in all guns blazing, with triple broadsides (straight issue before the High Court for meeellions, do not pass go, do not collect £200: no pre-action ('cease and desists') that I could see, it doesn't get much more aggressive). I should know: one of the defendants enquired with us for representation (we quoted very high, put it that way).

 

Still, there's plenty of listings for kodi boxes (still as "fully loaded" as before, but more quietly/carefully advertised) still around and, realistically (and without going into who/what these type of fly-by-night bedroom businesses support), unless there's a real possibility of clink time associated with the deed, it doesn't matter how aggressive rights owners get with the civil stuff (like Sky and others have been doing): chancers will still be having a go (or find useful idiot fall guys to front for them).

 

The business in R4 cartridges for Nintendo DS did not start to really taper down, until a student e-tailing them from his bedroom in Hull, got sent down for a couple of years (IIRC). Within a few months after that, there wasn't one to be seen advertised anywhere on eBay, Amazon or most other high volume places in the UK.

Edited May 4, 2017 by L00b

[sgtkate]

Technically yes. I think. I could download, from somewhere Im sure series 2 of fear the walking dead. It will be free on prime in the very near future (if it isnt already - I havent checked recently) so wheres the harm? That said certain services dont make anyones lives easier by making things available and unavailable at the drop of hat. Its either on demand or it isnt.

 

But prime isn't free, so you could easily argue that actually you are obtaining a service for free that should be paid for. My specific example is different as I'm already paying for the service that I'm watching, I just used torrent to obtain a copy of the show I'm already paying for through other means.

 

I'm glad it generated an interesting discussion, because there doesn't seem to be a *right* answer even from lawyers. This is a part of my day job working in this kind of area, the digital communications bill and it's impact on how my company needs to adapt, how the data harvested is stored, if the government did ban UK public from using VPN how can we do that as an ISP etc. It's fascinating TBH

Edited May 4, 2017 by sgtkate

[Cyclone]

I understood it was illegal to broadcast copyrighted material but not illegal to receive it, has that changed?

Additionally I would guess some of the material is under copyright and some not, how does the end viewer determine which is and which isn't?

 

You've been wrong for about 15 years at the very least, and probably since copyright laws first came into existence.

 

---------- Post added 04-05-2017 at 14:24 ----------

 

No. Do you steal CDs from supermarkets?

 

A CD is different though, you've permanently deprived the shop of a physical item.

If you take a photo of a poster in a supermarket, have you stolen from them (because you've breached copyright in exactly the same way as downloading a song).

 

---------- Post added 04-05-2017 at 14:26 ----------

 

wild flights of paranoia

 

The government in the UK has been shown to misuse legislation time and time again.

RIPA used for example against people who don't clear up dog poop, instead of the terrorists it was supposedly aimed at.

 

---------- Post added 04-05-2017 at 14:29 ----------

 

Time shifting via a video recorder is allowed.

 

So do I have to record it myself?

I don't believe so, so long as the device recording it has a valid license through someone. Ie a TV license, or a subscription.

 

What if my wife does it - and then I watch it - is that ok?

Pretty sure it is.

 

If so - what if I phone up on holiday and ask my flatmate to record the series that I've found out is on? Surely that's ok?

Can't see why not. The device has a license to record the broadcast via you and you're authorising someone to use the device.

 

So if someone has recorded it and I could have watched it, then I can download it from him and time shift like that?

Nope, that would be a breach of copyright.

 

It's a real minefield in many ways

 

Indeed.

A friend could come over and watch the recorded program as well, but if you gave him a copy then it's breach of copyright.

Now, here's an interesting edge case, you sell him your Tivo, I suspect he has no license to watch the things on that tivo, legally speaking. You lend him your tivo, it's fine, fair use.

 

---------- Post added 04-05-2017 at 14:32 ----------

 

But prime isn't free, so you could easily argue that actually you are obtaining a service for free that should be paid for. My specific example is different as I'm already paying for the service that I'm watching, I just used torrent to obtain a copy of the show I'm already paying for through other means.

 

I'm glad it generated an interesting discussion, because there doesn't seem to be a *right* answer even from lawyers. This is a part of my day job working in this kind of area, the digital communications bill and it's impact on how my company needs to adapt, how the data harvested is stored, if the government did ban UK public from using VPN how can we do that as an ISP etc. It's fascinating TBH

 

I think that in his example he pays for prime. But he's actually talking about getting the series in ADVANCE of him ever being able to watch it legally.

 

Anyway, the point is that just because you could have watched something in the past, or perhaps even DID watch it, you don't gain a license to have a copy to watch whenever you like. Although the fair use exclusion would allow you to record it and keep that recording indefinitely with an implicit right to watch it...

Perhaps anything that has ever been broadcast anywhere should automatically become a free license thereafter...