yep I totally agree. For some time now i've felt like this file sharing
was wrong and I should stop. But it was hard to stop. thanks for warner
bros for scaring me into it. I knew better than to do this. but let me
clear one thing up.
cox contacted me.
they emailed me advising me that i would lose my internet service unless
i complied with the email
cox wanted me to contact the group complaining about my stealing their
movie so I thought to myself "even if i do email these people how do I
know that cox will be informed of my compliance before the 24 hour
notice of shutoff?" so i contacted cox to have them document in there
system that I had in fact emailed the party and that I have removed the
material as ordered. So that was just to avoid any temporary
disconnection in service.
basically the manager at cox tech support advised me i will have no
problems and he made all the necessary documentation to keep my service
form being shut off. he also advised me that they have a 3 strikes and
your out policy.
If your service is shutdown for abuse or whatever then after the third
time it's permanent. no more service for you.
fortunately this incident is not strike 1, that's from the ppl at cox
themselves.
i'm just glad it's over with, stealing is not in my nature so why should
it be any different online. it isn't.
I posted this to hopefully make everyone aware that you can get caught
and really you should not be doing it at all. It's really no different
than going to the store and putting the dvd into your jacket pocket.
so i will keep my collection of stolen music and movies, but won't share
them and won't get anymore. that's the best compromise for me.
any opinions on this?
and Alan, yes, I'm sure the wifi thing was in jest, my reply to it was
in jest as well.
mike
Alan Dayley wrote:
>JD Austin said:
>
>
>>Your first mistake was contacting cox, unless you didn't admit it.
>>
>>
>
>The first mistake was infringing on someones copyright without a license.
>
>Granted, there are tales of letters sent based on filenames similar or the
>same as a movie that had nothing to do with infringing anything. That is
>stupidity on the MPAA or whoever to send the letter without real research.
> This does not excuse actual infringment.
>
>I am adimant about this point mainly for this reason: The GPL and most, if
>not all, Free Software and Open Source Software licenses derive their
>enforcement power and respect from the strength of copyright law. Period.
> Without copyright, these licenses would not be enforcable. The FS/OSS
>community and goals depend on the enforcability of these licenses.
>
>If I (we) expect others to respect and follow these licenses, I (we) must
>respect and follow the copyrights and licenses of others. Period. Is it
>inconvenient that I cannot copy someone else's work because of their
>copyright and license? Sure. Is it inconvenient for SCO that they
>cannot just appropriate Linux as their code to use as they will? Sure.
>Are the current pratices and business models of many industries,
>especially the entertainment industry, brain dead? Yes. BUT I (we) must
>respect their right to control their copyrighted work just as I expect
>them to respect mine.
>
>I suggest that all PLUGgers and FS/OSS users should not be copyright
>infringers. It hurts FS/OSS goals.
>
>Alan
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------
>PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
>http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)