> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew > Somerville > Sent: 29 January 2007 18:39 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [backstage] RE: [backstage] £1.2 billion > question (or RE: [backstage] BBC Bias??? >Click and Torrents) > > Brian Butterworth wrote: > >> Brian Butterworth wrote: > >>> Sorry if you didn't get why this is a "backstage" issue, let me > >>> explain more carefully. > >> I didn't say any such thing, someone else in the thread did. > > > > I don't recall say that YOU did. > > You were replying to my email, and you wrote "you", as quoted > above. I'm not sure how else I'm expected to take it. :-)
Sorry, I thought I was making a general reply... > >>> Also you can copy from a PVR onto a DVD burner legally. > >> > >> Are you sure? Where is that copyright permitted? Copying > things like > >> that (e.g. for backup) is not, as the Gower review made clear, as > >> this petition > >> says: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/privatecopy/ and as the > government > >> response agrees. > >> > >>> So I really can't see how using a computer network such as > >>> BitTorrent breaks any law, as long as both parties are domestic. > >> > >> It's not just "domestic use" in section 70, it's "private and > >> domestic use". I really can't see how using BitTorrent, in your > >> proposed operation, counts as private use. > > > > In the terms of "private and domestic use" the word "private" means > > that it is done by a private individual, rather than a company or > > other organization. There is no restriction on taking a videoed TV > > programme to another private dwelling and viewing it there. > > "domestic" means "in the home" (ie not in a shop, church, > etc). There > > is no restriction in law to carrying a VHS cassette or DVD > in a car, > > on a train or sending it in the post. As long as no money > is accepted then such a transaction is "private". > > I accept everything you write above. But you're not saying do > any of the above, you're saying *make a copy of the recording > of the broadcast* - none of the above involve copying. > > In your other email: > > The UK Copyrights and Patent's Act 1988 (as amended) does > not make any > distinction between timeshifting and sharing, > > Yes it does. It permits you, as you keep quoting it, to make > a recording of a broadcast to let you view or listen to it at > a more convenient time (timeshifting); it does *not* let you > make copies of that recording (sharing). As I said, and you > ignored, above. It's not in the copy of the Act that I am reading. In fact it uses the actual phrase "for the purpose of being placed in an archive". If what you said is true then the BBC and other broadcasters must take action against: * Sky, for the Sky+ boxes "COPY" facility * Combo PVR/DVD-R manufacturers who allow hard drive to DVD copies * Microsoft, as their XP and Vista Media Centers allow the recorded files to be copied over a network Whilst we are at it, the way that the MPEG-2 system works REQUIRES that the data is held in a memory buffer, because of the way that the temporal compression works, so it's very easy to argue that digital transmission is a store-and-forward system and would be impossible (and illegal by your logic) to use without many copies being made. Even taking the data from the recording on the hard drive and passing it to the MPEG-2 decoder is making a "copy" of the programme. > Anyway, this isn't really going anywhere. The sad thing here > is I probably completely agree with you that this is a big > issue that obviously needs to be dealt with, I just don't > think going around saying the law isn't as it is is at all helpful. Yeah, OK. My point was that the BBC is supposed to be impartial on these matters, but always reports this issue in a way that follows a particular line. The BBC is supposed to represent the interests of the licence fee payers who pay for it and should at least consider that their interests might be served by promoting an open-systems solution, rather than buying in a solution from a selected few companies. The BBC is supposed to be good for hardware manufacturers because their services can be watched and listened to on almost any hardware. Now using the biggest and best open system ever developed (the internet) to distribute their content, it would be wrong to suddenly decide that only Microsoft and Kontiki Delivery Manager can be the reception equipment. Thanks for providing feedback. > -- > ATB, > Matthew | http://www.dracos.co.uk/ > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To > unsubscribe, please visit > http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/653 - Release > Date: 26/01/2007 11:11 > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/653 - Release Date: 26/01/2007 11:11 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
