The rules explained

[setarip_old]

To understand what can/will happen with less strict rules regarding how source material was acquired, all you have to do is look at what happened to the now-castrated "Digital Video Forum"...

[laserfan]

Yeah I remember them. Haven't visited there in years!

[Swede]

And, don't forget, living about a 5 minutes walk from the serverpark that the police raids every now and then, due to piratebay and wikileaks and then seizes any servers on the premises, makes me a bit more interested in having moderators that keeps things under control.
So, stop beating them, stop discussing 'freedom of speech' and instead focus on the issues that this forum is about.

[tremens]

all this talk about the rule 6 violations is an obfuscation of the real problem that has occured. if anything, neuron2's enforcement of this has been comendable. piracy has nothing to do with what has happened.

[Guest]

@tremens

I appreciate the comment but please let's keep this thread about the rules and not any specific moderator.

Good to see you post after lurking (last post October 2004!) for so long, though.

[kieranrk]

Originally Posted by setarip_old

To understand what can/will happen with less strict rules regarding how source material was acquired, all you have to do is look at what happened to the now-castrated "Digital Video Forum"...

That doesn't give you (yes you setarip_old are the worst offender) the right to accost people asking how they created their source and where they got it from. There are countless legitimate reasons why someone could have a file and it is not your business to assume they are guilty and have to prove themselves innocent. The same goes with someone having access to Blu-Ray discs early and assuming they are a pirate.

[Guest]

That is correct. Normal users should just report posts or simply leave it to the mods.

[Doom9]

The same goes with someone having access to Blu-Ray discs early and assuming they are a pirate.

Has that ever happend? I'm unaware of ever seeing that - it goes to the very core of recent controversy though people either just make a fist in their pocket, go off the rails in public (and thus forfeit their right to an appeal... an appeal which in such a case almost certainly would've been granted without much discussion), instead of bringing the issue to my attention. This forum is pretty large, and it's not possible for me to look at every thread.

[kieranrk]

Originally Posted by Doom9

Has that ever happend? I'm unaware of ever seeing that - it goes to the very core of recent controversy though people either just make a fist in their pocket, go off the rails in public (and thus forfeit their right to an appeal... an appeal which in such a case almost certainly would've been granted without much discussion), instead of bringing the issue to my attention. This forum is pretty large, and it's not possible for me to look at every thread.

It was more setarip_old's assumption (and rather bizzare attempt to try and take the moral high ground) in this thread that people who had early copies of Blu-Rays were pirates: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=155777

[Doom9]

That thread's quite long.. you wouldn't happen to have a post reference, would you?

[mariush]

I work with videos all day for which I sign NDAs (non-disclosure agreements) and could end up paying huge fines if I were to divulge the name of the movie or details about it.

If I were to post a snapshot of one of those movies (allowed as long as it's not possible to identify the film from it) and ask some technical question, I can't just say what video that is from, yet I'm not pirating it.

In other cases, It's really annoying to see people asking some good questions only to see the next post from neuron2 saying "Where did you get that blah blah blah ... Forum members please don't reply to him until he clarified where he got the video". Sure, because I'm going to bookmark the page and refresh the page every 10 minutes just so I don't forget to answer this guys' question.

ex:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=155692
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=155801
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...03#post1421403
.. and so on...

In all civilized countries you're assumed innocent until proven guilty, here's it's the other way around.

Besides, even if the content posted IS copyrighted, there are a lot of cases where it's allowed to work with it.
For example, the latest DMCA granted the exception to rip a DVD for educational purposes, criticism, commentary and noncommercial videos.

Even if some guy would get a scene release from somewhere it would OK as long as he uses a sequence from that scene release let's say for a "critical review" or as fair use (a few seconds for some demonstration) or if he/she is a teacher to illustrate something in class. Yet nobody asks what the end result will be FOR, only about the source.

[Guest]

As long as we have a rule about illegitimate content, we cannot accept:

"Trust me, it's OK. I can't tell you the details."

Because then every poster could say that and the rule would be negated de facto. As the sticky in the General section has said for years, the onus is on you. If you won't or can't bear that, then I am afraid that is your problem.

I regret that you find my moderation annoying. Perhaps some meditation or other distraction may bring you relief.

[Speaking here for myself and not Doom9 or any other mod.]

[ChronoCross]

Moderating obvious content is something that needs to be done. However attempting to investigate the sources of peoples' content by most laws is beyond what is required by even the most draconian DMCA laws.

All that you should need to do is provide a DMCA/copyright method for content owners to use to remove this material. This is why youtube and other video sites are still around. It's one thing to promote blatant copyright infringement but it's a whole different beast to attempt to promote video manipulation. Besides one could make the argument that all the guides and software provided in itself is promoting copyright infringement. I'm sure there is some batshit lawyer getting this argument geared up already.

For example lets say you have a link to clip1. Nothing about it screams out copyrighted content. Is anyone here qualified to make a determination on whether it's fair use, public domain, copyrighted, authorized by copyright owner, etc?

Besides what makes copyrighted content any more special than tools to break DRM? This forum proudly promotes tools designed to do so even though breaking these protections is not clearly allowed by law.

[poisondeathray]

Originally Posted by ChronoCross

Besides what makes copyrighted content any more special than tools to break DRM? This forum proudly promotes tools designed to do so even though breaking these protections is not clearly allowed by law.

I'm not up to date on current laws, but in USA hasn't that recently changed ?

Fair Use Victories on the DMCA
July 26, 2010
http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/...victories-dmca

Another victory for common sense and fair use came today from the Librarian of Congress, acting on recommendations from Copyright Office. The latest ruling on exemptions to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act greatly expands access to encrypted, copyrighted works for fair use purposes.

blah..blah..blah

The rule only applies to DVDs, not to all audio-visual material--for instance to video games or slideshows or Blu-Ray.

Here's the official statement:
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2010/L...Statement.html

...
(1) Motion pictures on DVDs that are lawfully made and acquired and that are protected by the Content Scrambling System when circumvention is accomplished solely in order to accomplish the incorporation of short portions of motion pictures into new works for the purpose of criticism or comment, and where the person engaging in circumvention believes and has reasonable grounds for believing that circumvention is necessary to fulfill the purpose of the use in the following instances:

[Mug Funky]

@ mariush:

in those cases, i tend to speak in wide generalities, like "there seems to be difficulty in loading v210 quicktime files with qtinput... the framerate is coming out wrong".

of course, if there's an error specific to 1 file or disc, then it often means it can be difficult to get help with it. "posting a sample" has been something i've very rarely been able to do.

i've only had to sign 2 NDA's, in both cases a week or two after doing the actual job (and the world finding out about it independently). bit of a joke really. one was a government ad that never saw the light of day, one was a couple of shots on a feature film (that BOMBED in the box office... my God it was awful).

[Guest]

Originally Posted by ChronoCross

For example lets say you have a link to clip1. Nothing about it screams out copyrighted content. Is anyone here qualified to make a determination on whether it's fair use, public domain, copyrighted, authorized by copyright owner, etc?

As I posted above, such a post would attract no moderation at all.

Regarding the rest of your post, it is for Doom9. I guess he will consider it in the spirit it was offered...constructive and civil.

[lych_necross]

If someone signed a NDA pertaining to a pre-release DVD or Bluray, they can't discuss it on a forum. This is highly litigated world. The Digital Video Forum got neutered because of improper administration and moderation. I read today, that the Pirate Bay just had their servers seized in Sweden. All issues aside, this is a private forum and it can be run in any manner the owner(s) wishes. Personally, I think the rules are fine and that they are being enforced properly (for the most part). All of this complaining is childish and counter-productive. If you disagree, go somewhere else.

[manolito]

I decided to not do this via PM since I believe this is of general interest. My question is: What is the forum policy regarding downloaded clips from YouTube?

I know that "downloaded" is a buzzword which usually triggers a closing of the thread. But I remember an older post from a mod that since there are legitimate downloads, too, the poster has to explain and make it clear that this particular download was from a legitimate source, so it is not a rule #6 violation.

Now what about downloaded clips from YouTube?

The source is legitimate, they have licensed their content. The clips are not DRMed, no need to break any copy protection. Viewing the clips is certainly legal, what about downloading?

It is clear that Google does not like that users download their stuff, but there are dozens of browser extensions and other tools which make it easy to download it. Is this illegal?

I think that you can compare it to capturing TV broadcasts with a VCR or PVR. The broadcasters do not particularly like it, but it is legal as long as you do not do it for commercial purposes. And so far I have not heard of any lawsuits against providers of YouTube download tools by Google, much less against users of those tools.

So my question again: Can I request help regarding downloaded YouTube clips on this forum?


Cheers
manolito

[Guest]

You may discuss downloaded material for which you have legitimate rights (you may have purchased a right or it may have been legitimately granted to you). We do not rely exclusively on youtube policing, because there is often a delay before they take action (they have to receive a request from the copyright holder, etc.) So just because something is on youtube doesn't necessarily confer rights to you. Our general policy still applies: if you can show you have rights to the content then there will be no problem. But the onus is on you when considering discussing downloaded content, you have to show it is legitimate. If in doubt check with a moderator.

It's not hard to find threads discussing downloaded youtube stuff. In such cases the content is non-controversial.

Disclaimer: This is the policy as I understand it from several discussions with Doom9 and in Moderator Chat. Nevertheless, Doom9 may have a different view and if he does perhaps he will further clarify it for you.

For your reference on youtube policies:

http://www.youtube.com/yt/copyright/faq.html

[chrisschramm]

this post helpfull for all of us to understand all the general rule...

click this site