ammck55, a question

[boing2]

I was going to PM you with this but thought I would post instead

Could you explain why that 'bin/mpeg' thread was locked?

I have read the announcement thread and I have an idea of the rule you may be refering to but I would prefer you to tell me, why?, well as far as I could see (what with being a newb and all) there is nothing that refers to the guys question except perhaps one rule but then perhaps not?

In short tell me what was transgressed if you could

[jggimi]

If you have an incomplete file set, as ubernewb had, then it is reasonably obvious to the ordinarily prudent person that the file was not self-made.

We observe the rights of intellectual property owners. See the section titled "Piracy and Copyright" in www.doom9.org/disclaimer.htm for our definition of Fair Use.

See Rule 6 in http://forum.doom9.org/forum-rules.htm

[boing2]

Originally posted by jggimi
If you have an incomplete file set, as ubernewb had, then it is reasonably obvious to the ordinarily prudent person that the file was not self-made.

We observe the rights of intellectual property owners. See the section titled "Piracy and Copyright" in www.doom9.org/disclaimer.htm for our definition of Fair Use.

See Rule 6 in http://forum.doom9.org/forum-rules.htm

Would it not be within the scope of possibility that the bin file in question contained nothing other than a home movie mpeg perhaps as there was no indication that it contained illeagal material and as per the announcement rules there was NO indication that the material may have been illegal,?

This is inline with Doom 9s policy of not interpreting whether or not there may be an infringement:

"To keep us from having to decide which is which, we request that you not mention downloaded movies. Never. Also, don't mention any bootleg DVDs that you got from E-Bay or an Asian DVD/VCD Retailer, or anywhere else."


From this it could be quite feasible that the bin file could have saw itself landing in the hands of the original poster simply by way of [for example] a friend of his whom had [say for instance] some home video footage that he had already converted and burned to disc?, footage that the original poster was also interested in and simply arranged for the footage to be emailed to him perhaps?

The 'friend' whom had filmed the home footage we could also presume is new to this game and its myriad files and thusly sent [for whatever reason] purely the bin file for the guy to process?

After receiving the bin file the original poster is confused and sees himself arrive here for help, hence his post, ta da!

[jggimi]

We're all human. We can all make mistakes. That is why members may appeal the decisions and actions of a moderator. But, in this case: ubernewb did not appeal the decision. This lends credence to both ammck55's actions, and my interpretation of it, rather then your convoluted logic.

You also did not appeal the decision, per the process outlined in http://forum.doom9.org/sanctions.htm, though you are probably unaware of the process, and you have now lost your right to appeal.

Being newbies, neither of you were given strikes, per the same process, though ammck55 and I interpreted you both to be in violation of Rule 6. ubernewb for bringing up content that to us appeared to be from theft of intellectual property, and you, for providing assistance.

Rule 6, and our interpretation of it, exists to protect Doom9, his website, his forum, and the membership from litigation by those who have shown their willingness to use it globally. That includes protecting you, too.

We're strict in our interpretation of Rule 6 because we must be able to show, clearly, that we do not condone IP theft. That means we don't "wink" at it, however much you'd like us to.

In addition, its just the right thing to do.You do not have to like our rules. But you are required to abide by them when posting in Doom9's forum. You are free to go to other forums, or start your own.

[ammck55]

Boing2-An answer.

Announcement, Section 3. Any thread in which it may be interpreted that the writer has acquired the material in question through illegal channels will be closed immediately after an explanation is issued by a member of the Moderation Team.

I tiptoed around the issue when I pointed to the Announcement before closing the thread, so here it is. I made the assessment that ubernewb was posting a question on downloaded movie files from the Internet, pointed to the document that gives global coverage as to how these issues are handled, then closed the thread. The acquisition of consecutive .bin files and the joining of such are generally evidence of downloaded material. ubernewb has not contested the issue nor offered to provide evidence that the files in question are of "my brother's wedding" sent to me in an e-mail, or some other scenario.

I removed your included screenshot from the original thread not because of the content (the text of your message still stands), but because you'd captured at such a large resolution and not downsized the image that it stretched the table cell to such an extent that it required those ugly scrollbars at the bottom of the browser to see the entire thread. If your monitor's resolution is set to 1024x768, or larger, simply resize future screenshots to a more manageable size before posting.

I neither warned of an impending strike, nor issued one; the Newbies forum is the place to find out how things work before venturing out into the rest of the Forums where the tolerance level is generally a lot lower. The original thread was closed for the purpose of keeping either one of you from doing further harm to yourselves, not to avoid exposure. The biggest hissy-fits I've seen in my time here have been caused by the closure of threads on this very same topic and the subsequent denials, often voiced in loud aggressive tones, with the occasional profanity-laced post appearing. This thread is closed for that same reason.