B-17engineer
Colonel
..
Last edited:
Free Squadron Signal Publications online in PDF form
- Thread starter B-17engineer
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Thread starter
- #2
B-17engineer
Colonel
.....
Last edited:
machine shop tom
Senior Airman
- 504
- Apr 13, 2007
I have a feeling that that download could be considered unauthorizied distribution of copyrighted property.
tom
tom
109ROAMING
2nd Lieutenant
Yup.....
Heinz
Captain
Completely illegal, no such thing as free in this world.
This kinda thing is killing the music industry.
This kinda thing is killing the music industry.
Maestro
Master Sergeant
Although I do think sharing those links are illegal, I seriously doubt about your last statement...
The music industrty is mainly making money out of concerts (probably something like 80% up to 95%). Out of CDs, artists receive something like 10% of the retail price. Which make, for a CD sold at $20.00, a $2.00 profit... And not all CDs are sold $20.00, as I often see CDs in music stores advertised at $10.00.
Plus, in several countries including mine, "artists" receive financial help from gouvernment... No matter if the signer/band has a lot of succes or not. Which allows a lot of crap to show up on the radio, and very little space for new bands and way less money in my pockets to buy the damn CDs.
Also, illegal sharing of music through internet helped a lot of peoples to discover new unknown (or illegal in some countries) bands. Just think about Slayer or Metallica... You can't sell CDs of any of those two bands in Iran as they are considered as "satanists" over there, so are illegal.
And the music sharing community isn't filled with cheap mother f*ckers, as most peoples who really like a band will buy their CD anyway. As an example, I have both CDs of Nickelback and Three Days Grace, which didn't prevent me from (illegally) downloading both of their songs for my MP3 player.
So, you can't really compare the music industry with the book, movie or even porn industry... As most of them won't make money if they are illegally downloaded.
Heinz
Captain
Why do you think bands are touring more? Why is ok to rip of musicians? We don;t start stealing fuel/gas because oil companies have made 'more than enough'. I'm not saying you suggested this but this is a common argument.
Fact is its stealing no matter how much you sugar coat it. I'm musician, I'm fully aware of the industry at grass roots and international level. Acts like Metallica and Slayer achieved their base in a tape dominated generation. Im not saying tapes were never copied but now its so easy to download a song/album/discography that why on earth would you waste time going to the shop/store to purchase it.
The internet does more to help musical promotion than it does hinder but illegal downloading is stealing and therefore wrong. Not to mention I'm very much an audiophile and largely enjoy the fact I have a tangible collection that I can listen to at any time without needing a computer or mp3.
Then we have the fact Mp3 compression sucks the sound quality but clipping the low and high frequencies and adding a distinguishably tinny (to me) sound.
As for a book again I hate reading computer screens which is why they are largely safe, the new readers coming out I don;t honestly believe will make ebooks anymore popular, they are a gimic at best.
I will say I don't particularly care if people download or not, just don't try and justify theft it creates too many precedents.
Fact is its stealing no matter how much you sugar coat it. I'm musician, I'm fully aware of the industry at grass roots and international level. Acts like Metallica and Slayer achieved their base in a tape dominated generation. Im not saying tapes were never copied but now its so easy to download a song/album/discography that why on earth would you waste time going to the shop/store to purchase it.
The internet does more to help musical promotion than it does hinder but illegal downloading is stealing and therefore wrong. Not to mention I'm very much an audiophile and largely enjoy the fact I have a tangible collection that I can listen to at any time without needing a computer or mp3.
Then we have the fact Mp3 compression sucks the sound quality but clipping the low and high frequencies and adding a distinguishably tinny (to me) sound.
As for a book again I hate reading computer screens which is why they are largely safe, the new readers coming out I don;t honestly believe will make ebooks anymore popular, they are a gimic at best.
I will say I don't particularly care if people download or not, just don't try and justify theft it creates too many precedents.
beaupower32
Tech Sergeant
Yep, I thought it might be illeagle to. I would probably delete the ones you downloaded harrison, and delete the link. May be a mod can remove the link from this post too. They "might" have permission to post them, but I seriously doubt it.
Downloading isn't illegal at the moment, hosting/uploading is. Meaning that the link provided here is illegal, but you don't have to delete the downloaded files.
beaupower32
Tech Sergeant
Ah, got ya, thanks for clearing that up.
kgambit
Tech Sergeant
Not true - at least not in the USA.
"The (US) Copyright Act provides several specific rights to copyright owners, including the right to distribute the work and the right to make copies of the work (the "distribution" and "reproduction" rights). Uploading files on download networks can infringe a company's distribution right, while downloading a file necessarily makes a copy of that file and therefore can infringe the reproduction right."
Uploading files in Canada is infringement, just as in the US, but downloading files might not be.
I'm not conversant enough in European copyright to even begin to handle that side of things, EXCEPT that MOST European countries are signatories to the Berne Convention which provides that copyrighted works are protected by the laws of the AUTHOR's country.
"Authors of literary and artistic works protected by this Convention shall have the exclusive right of authorizing the reproduction of these works, in any manner or form."
Last edited:
This is the law in the Netherlands and I suppose in whole of Europe:
Auteurs law 1912, article 16c:
1. Als inbreuk op het auteursrecht op een werk van letterkunde, wetenschap of kunst wordt niet beschouwd het reproduceren van het werk of een gedeelte ervan, mits het reproduceren geschiedt zonder direct of indirect commercieel oogmerk en uitsluitend dient tot eigen oefening, studie of gebruik van de natuurlijke persoon die de reproductie vervaardigt.
Sumarised in English: The right for the authorship is not breached if it's reproduced without commercial purposes and only intended for personal use by the person who makes the reproduction.
This means that if you download it for your own personal use, you're not breaking the law, applying to above quotes article..
Uploading it means that you're not copying it for your own use, but spreading it for the benefit of others, thus doesn't apply to article 16c and is therefore illegal.
Things like Bittorrent, downloading and uploading is illegal, rapidshare isn't.
kgambit
Tech Sergeant
Thanks Marcel for the info, but it doesn't apply. And I'm not sure why rapidshare is any different since the files in question have been uploaded to a site which does spread it for the benefit of others.
As a signatory to the Berne convention, the copyright laws of the Netherlands are superseded by the terms of the Berne convention with respect to the rights of copyright and which country's laws protect those rights. Since Squadron publications are published in the USA, they are protected under USA copyright law and the USA copyright statues hold regardless of who uploads them, downloads them or what site they are uploaded to.
Therefore , with respect to the Squadron files, it is illegal to upload those files to or download them from rapidshare, even if it is for your own personal use. Unless the author of the publication has given Rapidshare explicit permission to distribute his work, it is illegal for rapidshare to offer those publications for download.
US copyright law:
§ 106. Exclusive rights in copyrighted works
Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:
(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;
(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;
(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;
(4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly;
(5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and
(6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.
§ 506. Criminal offenses
(a) Criminal Infringement. —
(1) In general. — Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed —
(C) by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution.
Since Squadron isn't GIVING those things away, the distribution of those publications which are clearly intended for commercial distribution is illegal, and a criminal infringement of the copyright under US copyright law. It does not matter that the intent is NOT for monetary gain by the download site. It's sufficient under US law that the download has monetarily impacted the author / publisher / distributor.
The key issue is NOT what European or Netherlands copyright law says, but what USA copyright law says since those particular publications are protected under USA copyright laws.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #14
B-17engineer
Colonel
Ok... and when the governemnt comes knocking on the door... I'll plead with them to let me go, and when they turn around to leave.......THAT WHEN I HIT THEM 
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #15
B-17engineer
Colonel
I honestly could care less if downloading something is illegal...come get me government! It honestly doesn't matter...it matters just as much as getting flagged and put on a government list if you go to the KKK's official website....... it means nothing. (not that I go there.)
Come get me government! Oh wait.... it's run by Donkey's ...... too dumb.
So now lets move on?????????????????????? And you can discredit me, think I'm a bad person, whatever..... , and if you if you do think so, GUESS WHAT?!?!!? I honestly don't care........ I'm done.
Last edited:
yes, but downloading isn't.
The Netherlands subscribed the convention in 1912, together with instating above author's law. The law is complying to the convention and according to the law, only the one spreading the items is criminal.
Therefore , with respect to the Squadron files, it is illegal to upload those files to or download them from rapidshare, even if it is for your own personal use. Unless the author of the publication has given Rapidshare explicit permission to distribute his work, it is illegal for rapidshare to offer those publications for download...[/quote]
Well law as you quoted them nowhere says that downloading is illegal, although I agree with you that uploading them is. Rapidshare therefore does a criminal act by offering these files, but Harrison cannot be procecuted by having them downloaded (although publishing the site here is indeed against the law)
Just to highlight the important parts of your quote (as you have done yourself) with my comment in bold.:
US copyright law:
(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords; here is unclear who is reproducing. Maybe an US judge judged downloading also reproducing, but in Europe this is not interpreted by the judges as such.
(3) to distribute copies meaning uploading, downloading is not distributing it
(4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly; note perform publicly, which doesn't apply here in this case)
(5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and again publicly, not applying to downloading for personal use)
(6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission. again publicly, which applies to uploading, but not to downloading for personal use
§ 506. Criminal offenses
(a) Criminal Infringement. —
(1) In general. — Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed —
(C) by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution talking about making available, again not downloading.
absolutely right apart from the word download. The upload has impacted the author etc, not the download.
Absolutely right but nowhere in your quoted us laws does it say anything about getting the items, only about spreading them.
Hey, chill, I was actually defending you, telling everybody that you didn't do an illegal act.
- Thread starter
- #18
B-17engineer
Colonel
Sorry meant to quote another person.
The whole post wasn't directed at you
nor was any of it.
I know people who have been downloading illegal music for years...... they have never been prosecuted. So everyone who thinks oh the big bad government is gonna get me... well you are sorely misinformed. (Not to you Marcel)
The whole post wasn't directed at you
nor was any of it. I know people who have been downloading illegal music for years...... they have never been prosecuted. So everyone who thinks oh the big bad government is gonna get me... well you are sorely misinformed. (Not to you Marcel)
109ROAMING
2nd Lieutenant
How is the American Government dumb?
- Thread starter
- #20
B-17engineer
Colonel
I can send you a PM about that.... not here though.
