Are downloaders of copywrited adult material (movies, pics, etc.) through file sharing programs & bit torrent monitored & prosecuted by the MPAA (or whoever it would be for this,) as downloaders of copyrighted movies & music are?
No because the pornography* studios aren’t members of the MPAA and as far as I know don’t have a similar organisation that pursues copyright infringement.
*I’m assuming this what you’re using “adult” as a euphemism for.
yea I just think ‘adult’ sounds more sophisticated
cool so that’s good news
Actually incorrect, a man was sued and ordered to pay about $34000 for using the cover image of a DVD for a review he did of an adult film, he was sued because he did not have permission to do so. Another was fined $300000 odd for selling, without permission, pictures from adult studios. There was a case of a man being sued for sharing an adult movie. Therefore yes they do deal with copyright infringement it is jsut some studios are more aggressive than others.
As with anything on this side of things, you take the chance of being caught if you choose to do it. THerefore if you get caught tough luck.
Prosecuted or not, it is still illegal
I don’t know about elsewhere but that lawsuit would be thrown out here in the U.S., here is an excerpt from the U.S. Fair Usage Clause:
“The fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.”
Yes itâ€™s true what JayC30 is saying and to top it of here is some more BAD News to your question! The FBI and Interpol are also monitoring Adult material on the Net and who is downloading or uploading it and they have a lot bigger STICK and hit harder than the MPAA. Anything with Adult content is best stay clear of.
Minga: Talk about paranoid! One would only hope the FBI was out looking for people who put bombs under gas storage tanks and nukes in their suit cases then watching you download Nurses in Latex volume 186. Stay away from the kiddy porn and you can keep wanking away till your eyes bleed.
Another incorrect statement as it was in the US and the studio in question was Raging Stallion, because the image was taken from the website as the person did not have a scanner, where there are warnings about using images without consent.
That is not an incorrect statement, that is the law. Read the laws!
Once again the law clearly states:
Last time I checked NOBODY was seriously worried if it was fair use or not. Take that game “Black” something? A quick check showed it had been loaded about 1.6 million times. And that was only 1 site. People dont care anymore. Backing up is used as a polite term. You can hit people just so many times with all these words until they become so num to it they simply don’t care anymore. If you don’t want you work or image captured don’t put it on the net. Seems simple enough.
I just spent 10 minutes on Google and could find NO reference to this. I’m pretty sure you made it up. Please provide a link and if possible an actual case name.
If people could sue anyone who gave them a bad review saying that the cover of their product was off-limits, nobody would ever write a review.
I call BS.
That’s not what the original poster was asking about.
You’re missing the point, if the guy was writing a review and situated in the US then he’s within his fair use rights to use a copy of the cover on the webpage. The fact that he took the image from someone else’s website rather than scan it himself might complicate matters somewhat but it’s still a grey area. What on earth does “NOBODY was seriously worried if it was fair use or not” mean? Fair use rights aren’t irrelevant (not yet anyway) they’re part of the law.
I agree I would provide the link but unfortunately this was over a year ago and was posted on another forum, p-2-p related which is now closed and so I could not provide it. I just remembered it because it struck me as rediculous, as the person had written a good review and used the cover just so people would know what to look for.
I will look for the link, though given the nature of the material I am not sure I will be allowed to post it. If I find it wil PM it to you.
“That’s not what the original poster was asking about” - Mr. Horse
Only the second part was, my concern expressed here for the issue of downloading/uploading copyrighted adult material is the same I have for the downloading & sharing of all copyrighted content, not whether or not it is illegal, but what the chances are of getting caught. So so far there’s been a few varried responses, one person claims he/she’s only heard of one person being sued by a studio for sharing a film, another claims that actually they are coming down even harder on this than they are the illegal P2P downloading/uploading of copyrighted music & mainstream movies?
I don’t think im going to loose any sleep tonight over doing a right click save as. It may be part of law but as I said who cares? The world has turned into a bunch of machines. Do you have a pic / Product you don’t want me to save. Send me the URL and ill be glad to post it back to you in a web site.
What does “Nobody cares” mean. They ain’t buying discs by the thousands to back up Linux. Don’t be a dope
Did you even read any of this thread, bkf?
I read all of it, whats your point? If it’s on the net it just became fair game
Actually you’ve just done an excellent job of summing up one of the related laws to fair use.
There is NO expectation of privacy if an image is made publicly available. The use of an image that is freely available (not inside the member’s area, for example) of a website is NO DIFFERENT from the use of an image that is tacked to the side of a building. You can’t hang up a poster on your doorway and expect that you can somehow protect the copyright you have on that poster.
“But the reviewer made money!” I hear the cries now. But he didn’t make money directly due to the reproduction.