Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Grey area on downloading?

  • 15-05-2008 2:24pm
    #1
    ilovemybrick
    Registered Users Posts: 676 ✭✭✭


    This is not to encourage in any way shape of form the circumvention of copyright. I have a fairly good idea about copyright in general having worked for a company who sell photo image rights but I have a question.

    If an individual use a specific format of google search such as

    -inurl:(htm|html|php) intitle:”index of” +”last modified” +”parent directory” +description +size +(wma|mp3) “x music artist”

    and then downloads the hosted file for free from that blog or filestorage system

    The idea of legally held files being downloade opens the question as to who is committing an offence. ie is it the uploader (who can claim that they are holding legitimate copies of a file in a personal filestorage system) or the downloader? (who can claim that the file was freely available in a public domain)

    Secondly what offence, if any, is being committed?


    edit : it shouldn't be a smiley in the script.


Comments

  • #2
    Pines
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 225 ✭✭Pines


    ilovemybrick wrote: »
    If an individual use a specific format of google search such as

    -inurl:(htm|html|php) intitle:”index of” +”last modified” +”parent directory” +description +size +(wma|mp3) “x music artist”

    and then downloads the hosted file for free from that blog or filestorage system

    ... who is committing an offence ... what offence, if any, is being committed?

    The search is not an offence, it's just a search and you are locating the existence of files which may be, as you say, legally held. The result of the search is merely a fact, incovered by an automated search engine script, so that result is not an infringement.

    When you download the file, if the work is subject to copyright in this country, then the downloader is infringing copyright, and possibly also the uploader. The fact that the uploader owns a legal copy doesn't mean the work is not subject to copyright: if I own a legally held copy of a book, and you photocopy it, the work being copied is subject to copyright.

    You asked what the offence is. It may not be an offence, i.e. a criminal offence, if for example it's not on a commercial scale, but it is a civil wrong for which you can be sued or for which an injunction may be given.

    The specific infringements are:

    downloader: making a copy of the work (section 37(1)(a))

    uploader: making available a copy of the work to the public (sections 37(1)(b) and 40(1)(a). For the uploader, issues of jurisdiction might arise, if they are located outside Ireland, and much of this is unsettled law.

    The record companies would argue (and are arguing in the High Court at the moment) that the ISP is also an infringer or implicated in the infringement by facilitating the infringement.


Advertisement