Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Amiga Kit Amiga Store Hollywood MAL AMIStore App Store A600 Memory

AuthorTopic: Pirates and TOSEC sucks  (Read 5515 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GadgetMaster

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #45 on: July 24, 2003, 08:18:39 PM »
Quote

NitrousB wrote:
@GadgetMaster

If you reread my post you will see the initials of the offending site, i know what site was distributing the roms, but there is no need to call tosec pirates as they are not distributing nothing


I agree !

I think the original poster got  a bit carried away with the thread title etc. ;-)
 

Offline seer

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #46 on: July 24, 2003, 08:21:00 PM »
Find the provider that this site buys bandwidth from, check the acceptable use policy and take it from there. If their policy doesn't cut it, then find out who their upstream provider is.


This is AFAIK and it's not 100% acurate but ;

I can "buy" an old oil platform, go to international waters, proclaim to be a state of some sorts, get a "." extension (.seer ;-) ) and run several nice internet servers.. As I don't have to obey US/EU/whatever laws I'm not bopund to TM and @ notices.. AFAIK there's one such old platform out there hosting numerous gambling sites.. Could be mistaken about that tho

Anyway, how do you think to shut down a provider in a country far from yours with different laws ?
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you.
~
 

Offline Tomas

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #47 on: July 24, 2003, 08:25:33 PM »
those code wheels was sure annoying.. One of the few games i bought was Monkey island.. Few months later, i managed to lose the wheel, then the game was totally unusable  :-x
 

Offline Ni72ous

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #48 on: July 24, 2003, 08:29:49 PM »
@Seer
Quote
I can "buy" an old oil platform, go to international waters, proclaim to be a state

There is something like that in the uk, the bloke who owns it has even given out passports
Ni72ous
 

Offline Tomas

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #49 on: July 24, 2003, 08:30:25 PM »
Quote
the A600 on the other hand was a bad idea... ok, it was cheap, but nothing else

agree there... the a500 was a much better piece of hardware... They should have released the a1200 at the time they released the 600

a500+ should not have been released either..
 

Offline seer

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #50 on: July 24, 2003, 08:32:47 PM »
@NitrousB

ThanX, I wasn't sure about this.. IIRC he "crowned" himself to be a prince and has a princedom (Not sure that's an English word) and is sovereign (again sp?) state..
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you.
~
 

Offline GadgetMaster

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #51 on: July 24, 2003, 08:36:35 PM »
Isn't it called the state of SeaLand or something?
 

Offline GadgetMaster

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #52 on: July 24, 2003, 08:42:37 PM »
A quick google later....

Everything you need to know about Sealand with pics. :-D

http://www.fruitsofthesea.demon.co.uk/sealand/index.html

and

http://www.sealandgov.org/
 

Offline Ni72ous

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #53 on: July 24, 2003, 08:45:32 PM »
@GadgetMaster

Thats the place, i was not sure what it was called
Ni72ous
 

Offline iamaboringperson

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #54 on: July 24, 2003, 10:14:58 PM »
Quote
It is if your friend is holding a Coke can that has coca cola's trademarked wave displayed. Taking a picture of this without express written permission is an illegal copy of thier trademark, and thus "piracy".
Belial6, learn some law... the 'coke' logo is regitered as a trade mark. why? for the very simple fact that you cant actually copyright a logo(well people try that because the cat afford to register a trademark, but does it have the same effect? not likely!) read up on copyright law, please.
Quote
What you call forgiveness, others would call hypocracy. "I got mine, now we should stop everybody else."
sorry, i didnt mention that i also mean that it should be destroyed!
Quote
YES, I am suggesting I want the law to change.
i wonder if anybody else is with you on this one?
Quote
The idea of copying someone as being wrong is a new concept that was created with the relatively new idea of copyright.
i dont doubt the fact that copyright law is reletivly new... the idea of Interlectual Property is ancient... However, how new or old it is is completly irrelevant. how is a new legislation nessarilly more 'wrong' than an old one?
Quote
For thousands of year, humanity, AND business functioned perfectly fine without copyright.
Well apparently not.  The whole reason copyright exists is that authors would write a book, take it to a publisher, who would publish it and pay the author for his work, and then a whole bunch of other *SCUM* publisher's would completly rip-off both of them... is that fair? is that the way you would like it to work again? ripping-off authours and their chosen publishers work, soley for your own selfish gain?
Quote
But evil? You must be kidding?
I would like to ask you, Belial6, why would i be kidding? Do you not see any logic in what i am telling you?
Quote
Everything created is derivitive, right down to the words you used to write your response.
Here you are twisting the meaning of what i have written. YOU KNOW that i am not talking about 'derivation'!  you have delibratly chosen to change the subject from copying the actual works of a person to basing work on anothers 'ideas', ideas cannot be copyrighed! I would of hopped that by you writing a rant relating to copyright, that you would know somthing about actual copyright law. Since you have been deceitful, by changing the whole meaning, by actually changing what we are discussing from IP to ideas, i can only assume you do NOT know about copyright, and therefore your rant is based on pure ignorance and not fact.(well i know its not based on fact)
Quote
If copying someone is "evil" as opposed to illegal, all humanity is evil from the begining of speech onward.
Again Belial6, you are misusing the terminology here... the language is not copyrighted, it is specifically public domain.  An authors actual works may be copyrighted. Either you are mis-guided about copyright law, or you are so against the protection of artists work and payment to the respective copyright holders, that you can only think of decietful arguments to support your cause, that alone shows that you really dont seem to have a rational argument in your defence...

 

Offline iamaboringperson

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #55 on: July 24, 2003, 10:28:18 PM »
Quote

mikeymike wrote:
How was the A500+ "a step forward"?  It was either KS2.x, 1MB chip - can't remember... even if it had both of those who would have cared at the time?

mikeymike, you are forgetting what computers were like in the 80's(and early 90's)! an extra 1/2 meg of ram in a computer as standard was seen as a BIG improvement! especialy if that ram is chip ram on your amiga, and especialy if its possible to ad another 1 meg to the trap door!
what a huge improvement!
i remember painting on my old A500(with .5meg fast, .5 meg chip), and always running our of chip ram - then trying the same thing on another persons A500+, and i could get the job done  :-o
this guy also had KS 2.04(i had 1.3) and i loved that too! back then(you probably wouldnt notice so much these days) AmigaOS 2 was so much more proffessional

back in those days the A500+ was an absolutly huge difference
probably the only real problem is that some things were a bit slower, since nothing ran in fast
(BTW i believe my A500 was hacked so that the so called 'slow-ram' actually became fast-ram!! :-o  )
 

Offline Spyros

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #56 on: July 24, 2003, 10:46:07 PM »
I agree with Decore.

The site has many old and rare utilities and games for many old computers. It would be a shame for them to disappear.

What's the problem with you guys? Haven't you got anything better to do than to concern yourselves with the copyrights of programs that are 20 years old?
 

Offline Belial6

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #57 on: July 25, 2003, 12:42:15 AM »
Quote
Belial6, learn some law... the 'coke' logo is regitered as a trade mark. why? for the very simple fact that you cant actually copyright a logo(well people try that because the cat afford to register a trademark, but does it have the same effect? not likely!) read up on copyright law, please.


You might be right, it might not be illegal to make copies of someones trademark unless it is used in trade.  So, let me give a better example.  You take a picture of your pal, and he happens to be in frount of a movie theater, or in a room with a movie poster that makes it into the shot.  The movie post DOES have a copyright.
 
Quote
i wonder if anybody else is with you on this one?

I believe most consumers do agree.  Do they (or I) believe that copyright should be completely destroyed?  Some probably do, but most would be happy if it could be returned to a workable form.  Obviously many on this board think it needs to be changed.

Quote
Here you are twisting the meaning of what i have written. YOU KNOW that i am not talking about 'derivation'! you have delibratly chosen to change the subject from copying the actual works of a person to basing work on anothers 'ideas', ideas cannot be copyrighed!


Definition of idea
All copyright does is protect 'ideas'.  That is the whole point.  Hence the 'Intellectual' part of 'Intellectual Property'.  And with the 'derivative' rant, are you saying that the crackers who change the code on the game before distributing it are ok?  I'm doubting that.  Copyright is supposed to protect against both exact copies, AND derivative works.

Quote
the idea of Interlectual Property is ancient... However, how new or old it is is completly irrelevant. how is a new legislation nessarilly more 'wrong' than an old one?


What makes it relevent is that right and wrong are human constructs.  There is a very large contingent of the population who believe that outlawing the use of human knowledge and culture, sometimes to the point that the culture is lost, is evil.

Also, can you point me to a IP reference that would support the statement of IP being ancient?  You are the first person I have run across that made that statement.

Quote
Well apparently not. The whole reason copyright exists is that authors would write a book, take it to a publisher, who would publish it and pay the author for his work, and then a whole bunch of other *SCUM* publisher's would completly rip-off both of them... is that fair? is that the way you would like it to work again? ripping-off authours and their chosen publishers work, soley for your own selfish gain?


Well, since everybody constantly uses ideas that others came up with on a daily bases, it becomes a gray issue.    What ideas are ok to use, and which are not are pretty much constucts of the copyright law itself.  Do we call children who sing Ring Around the Rosies "evil" because they didn't get the authors permision?  What about a partent that tells their child the story of Jack and the Beanstalk?

Quote
the language is not copyrighted, it is specifically public domain.

You seem to be working off of the premise that copying someone is evil because it is illegal, and thus should be illegal because it is evil.  It's a circular argument.

I take all of the 'your a big dummy' jabs as attempts to prove me wrong without facts.  It is a common tactic in such situations, when logic fails on the subject.  And perhaps the points on everyone committing copyright violations hits a little to close to home.
 

Offline T_Bone

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #58 on: July 25, 2003, 05:02:21 AM »
> TOSEC aint a pirate team, YEAH right.

Tosec is simply a catalog. It doesn't really have anything to do with piracy. It would be like calling the Library Of Congress database a pirate organization.

\edit\ ever read an old thread, and reply to the first post without reading the rest of the thread to realise you're repeating someone else? :)
this space for rent
 

Offline iamaboringperson

Re: Pirates and TOSEC sucks
« Reply #59 on: July 25, 2003, 11:34:31 PM »
Belial6, im getting sick of your lies and ignorance, and this will be the last time i post in this thread.

Quote
You might be right, it might not be illegal to make copies of someones trademark unless it is used in trade. So, let me give a better example. You take a picture of your pal, and he happens to be in frount of a movie theater, or in a room with a movie poster that makes it into the shot. The movie post DOES have a copyright.
im leaving this alone. you have no idea what copyright is about, you obviously dont understand the rules, and its obvious that you havent even attempted to study them, instead you are asking me for the answers, unless you go and study some copyright laws, i suggest you see a lawyer.
Quote
I believe most consumers do agree. Do they (or I) believe that copyright should be completely destroyed? Some probably do, but most would be happy if it could be returned to a workable form. Obviously many on this board think it needs to be changed.
would you mind explaining to everyone what a 'workable form' is, and why your oppinion is so much better than everyone elses, nobody else on this board seem to think that copyright is wrong
Quote
Definition of idea
All copyright does is protect 'ideas'.
Wrong! i just said to you that copy right will not protect ideas - so dont give me a definition of 'idea', you are plainly wrong
I dont know where you live, however, i would like to point you to www.copyright.org.au. please study this, you have no idea what copyright means, this is my main resource when i need to know somthing about copyright
if you knew somthing about copyright, you would know that 'ideas' may not be copyrighted. an actual representation of an idea that can be copyrighted. if you write your ideas on paper, your actual text may be subject to copyright, thats not an idea, it is text.
If you are not familliar with the game(or its history) 'Tetris', i suggest you go and study its history.
you might find that the creator of tetris has been threatening to take legal action against a large number of authors of 'Tetris' clones, for what they term as a 'look and feel copyright', the fact is that they are wrong, there is no such thing as a 'look and feel copyright', just like you cant copyright an idea.
you can not copyright rules to a game, you can copyright the written interpretation to those rules. the rules are only an idea.
you can not copyright an invention, that is what patents are for, an invention is an idea. however you can copyright the actual blueprints for that invention, blueprints are a representation of an idea.
in australia you may not copyright 3D objects, however, you can copyright 2D representations of those 3D images.
a 3D piece in a board game for example can not be copyrighted, the blueprints for makeing that piece, or sketches of that piece may be copyrighted
**please learn that ideas may not be copyrighted**
If you were to study copyright law, you would already know that a word, or a phrase, or a one-liner, may NOT be copyrighted.
Quote
Well, since everybody constantly uses ideas that others came up with on a daily bases, it becomes a gray issue.
Belial6, there are no grey issues, remember that ideas are not copyrighted, i dont know if english is your first language, but you still get confused between an idea, and a representation of an idea... proves to me that you dont know what you are talking about from the begining
Quote
What ideas are ok to use, and which are not are pretty much constucts of the copyright law itself.
Wrong. study it!
Quote
You seem to be working off of the premise that copying someone is evil because it is illegal,
where have i said that? and i noted that you used the word 'someone' when i am talking about THINGS, i hope you are not trying to decieve, and deliberatly twist my words, by replacing 'somthing' with 'someone', you cant copyright a person, they can copyright their work
Quote
and thus should be illegal because it is evil. It's a circular argument.
point out where I have written a circular argument. you have just written a sentence that has nothing to do with anything that i have written, and you are implying that it is what i mean... it is not
Quote
I take all of the 'your a big dummy' jabs as attempts to prove me wrong without facts.
the fact is, that i have the facts(from copyright.org.au), and you dont know the facts, and dont understand copyright in general
Quote
It is a common tactic in such situations, when logic fails on the subject.
Belial6, you cant have a logical argument when you dont know what you are talking about
i would say that unless you are only playing dumb, you would think i am not logical, because you have no idea as to what copyright is about
Quote
And perhaps the points on everyone committing copyright violations hits a little to close to home.
Everyone?

Belial6, you dont seem to be the sort who would steal a persons car or vcr, and think its good, just because you dont believe in the right to private property.

i would hope that you wouldnt kill an innocent person just because 'once apon a time there were no laws against murder'

please tell me, Belial6, that you are not the sort of person who jumps on the bandwaggon when 'everybody' else is doing somthing that is moraly wrong

dont tell me that all the software publishers, authurs, artists view of wanting to protect their work; their IP, should be disregarded(irrespective of what the law says), just because you disagree with copyright

please dont say that you would choose to violate the rights of others just for the sake of picking up some free software, when there is plenty of legal(and perfectly moral) free software out there from users who choose to give it away
...that you as a pirate are right, and software developers are wrong for wanting to protect their work.

Belial6, i wouldnt like to hear that you are a pirate
because if i ever caught you pirating any of my programs, i would rip your ####ing balls off, and eat them for breakfast. and that would be perfectly ok, according to your logic, because once there was no law about that kind of thing, and its a kind of grey area anyway. perhaps the law is wrong, and people who believe in respecting other peoples rights, and choose to not violate the rights of others, should be shot or raped because you disagree with the rules that society has only recently put on people. and that if a person doesnt want their software copied, they shouldnt release it, and if they dont want their car stolen, they shouldnt leave them out on the street.



BTW Belial6, what is your view of anarchy?