How Legal Is The Pandora?

[amortvigil]

? The Pandora ... should that be legal?

If you're talking about emulators... well, then no PC worldwide is legal. They can all play emulators.

LOL

 

[second exodous]

Pulling game data off of media, say PSX games or if you have one of those modded NES consoles to pull off the data from carts, constitutes fair use, you are allowed to make backups of everything you own.

Now, if you own a console, say a Playstation, then it's legal to emulate it. I own 3 devices capable of playing the PSX games I backed up on my HD so I feel really comfortable.

If for some weird reason you have you Pandora confiscated and they find game or systems that you don't own on it then maybe you need to worry. But Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, Sega, or who ever don't go after individuals or even groups of people they have to come in physical contact with (confiscating your Pandora) they like to go after file sharers, so if you get caught pirating games it won't be because you're sitting in a park playing your Pandora, it will be from them catching you downloading the games off the interent.

Honestly, this comes up everywhere, on emulator forums also. The MPAA have everyone believing ripping CD's is illegal. Did you know that you can let your friend borrow all your CD's to make copies of? That is covered by fair use also, you can give copies away as long as it's not for money and as long as it's someone you know. The reason Napster was illegal was it was anonymous, the people you downloaded from you didn't know. If Napster was a plugin for a social network or instant messenger and you only had people you knew on your list you could share, i.e. give away copies, to all the media you own. Sharing a file you got form one of your friends is however not fair use, they would have to get it from someone who bought it.

Does anyone know what happened to those sites that cited laws and Constitutions of countries that pointed out how Napster was legal? Here in the US it was a bunch of fair use laws. I worried at the time that lawyers would use that research to change the laws, I guess it might have happened.

Anyway, that applies to everything: Books, games, movies, music, software, anything pretty much with a copy write. Anyone want to meet up and swap PSX images? It's legal as long as we're 'friends', and I'll be your friend if you give me a bunch of games.

 

[Gary13579]

I'm sorry, but that is a bunch of bull, second exodus. You are entitled a single back up copy of anything you own, and you may not have both copies in use at the same time. Sharing the copies is illegal, whether it's online or with your BFFFFFFL.

It gets a lot more complicated when it comes down to music.

Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), unless authorized by the owners of copyright in the sound recording or the owner of copyright in a computer program (including any tape, disk, or other medium embodying such program), and in the case of a sound recording in the musical works embodied therein, neither the owner of a particular phonorecord nor any person in possession of a particular copy of a computer program (including any tape, disk, or other medium embodying such program), may, for the purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage, dispose of, or authorize the disposal of, the possession of that phonorecord or computer program (including any tape, disk, or other medium embodying such program) by rental, lease, or lending, or by any other act or practice in the nature of rental, lease, or lending. Nothing in the preceding sentence shall apply to the rental, lease, or lending of a phonorecord for nonprofit purposes by a nonprofit library or nonprofit educational institution. The transfer of possession of a lawfully made copy of a computer program by a nonprofit educational institution to another nonprofit educational institution or to faculty, staff, and students does not constitute rental, lease, or lending for direct or indirect commercial purposes under this subsection.

 

[Sitwon]

Wow, those TI guys are a bunch of jerks. Why do they get to have all the fun? ;-)

I'm also curious what the patent was for.

What? They handle a patent issue for OP and they are jerks?

Was it not obvious enough that I was being facetious?

 

[Tokiopop]

Wow, those TI guys are a bunch of jerks. Why do they get to have all the fun? ;-)

I'm also curious what the patent was for.

What? They handle a patent issue for OP and they are jerks?

Was it not obvious enough that I was being facetious?

T'was indeed!

 

[second exodous]

I'm sorry, but that is a bunch of bull, second exodus. You are entitled a single back up copy of anything you own, and you may not have both copies in use at the same time. Sharing the copies is illegal, whether it's online or with your BFFFFFFL.

It gets a lot more complicated when it comes down to music.

Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), unless authorized by the owners of copyright in the sound recording or the owner of copyright in a computer program (including any tape, disk, or other medium embodying such program), and in the case of a sound recording in the musical works embodied therein, neither the owner of a particular phonorecord nor any person in possession of a particular copy of a computer program (including any tape, disk, or other medium embodying such program), may, for the purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage, dispose of, or authorize the disposal of, the possession of that phonorecord or computer program (including any tape, disk, or other medium embodying such program) by rental, lease, or lending, or by any other act or practice in the nature of rental, lease, or lending. Nothing in the preceding sentence shall apply to the rental, lease, or lending of a phonorecord for nonprofit purposes by a nonprofit library or nonprofit educational institution. The transfer of possession of a lawfully made copy of a computer program by a nonprofit educational institution to another nonprofit educational institution or to faculty, staff, and students does not constitute rental, lease, or lending for direct or indirect commercial purposes under this subsection.

First off, what you quoted above is after Napster, when the huge corporations changed things.

I'm not too surprised that I might be wrong actually, but that was the legal defense of Napster. I remember one plugin for MSN was sued for sharing like I said above but the only reason that they lost was the files were being re-distributed, i.e. you could get files from one friend after he downloaded it from someone else that didn't own the file. I'm sure if the company suing them wanted to bleed them dry they didn't need to use 'redistributing' music, but they ended it pretty fast. Fair use is a throw back to books though, someone could make a copy of a book you own, but the prosecution of Napster pointed out that was making a copy by hand, not xerox machine.

The laws are not cut and dry, or were not, hence the reason for the DMCA. The DMCA doesn't change the laws, that would be too much work to change all those laws, but part of the DMCA makes it illegal to circomvent DRM or copy-protection scemes. Think about it, why would you need a law to make it illegal to break copy protection when sharing that media is illegal in the first place?

When the laws were made they didn't think anything like cassette taps, or even records, would come about. Now it's even easier with CD's. Also, how those laws are interpreted is funny also, who interprets them? Lower courts persuaded by expensive lawyers hired by mega corporations that don't want their stuff shared even if it tramples on users rights(I want to rip and encode my DVD danget). Then, maybe it will be heard by Supreme Courts, Judges that have probably at some point in time were involved with these mega corporations.

Read up on court cases against companies like Napster, I think the companies like them have a better understanding of what the laws mean. Hence the reason for the DMCA.

Edit: I want to point out that I might be wrong, but I'm remembering the defense side of Napster and other cases back in the day. Before Napster the owners were usually the winners, like Disney Vs. VHS tapes, but now it's usually who has the most money, it's like the legal system is paid off. Also, it's just not sharing, it's copy write extensions. If Disney would have tried to change those laws 30 years ago they would have lost but now they will own Mickey Mouse forever, yet they make movies about Sleeping Beauty and Peter Pan.

This is just the US though, I can't say anything for other countries.

 

[Gary13579]

:rolleyes: okay then, keep living in your fantasy world. don't be shocked when you're arrested.

 

[second exodous]

Eh, I don't 'pirate' a lot of stuff, I don't download games or music on the internet so if somehow a huge corporation finds out I have a few games on my HD that I got from friends then kudos to them.

 

[Yoyobuae]

:rolleyes: okay then, keep living in your fantasy world. don't be shocked when you're arrested.

Even worst, a lawsuit against you.
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/

I like this part:
http://beckermanlegal.com/pdf/?file=/howriaa.htm

How many songs have you pirated? Multiply that times $750:
http://beckermanlegal.com/howriaa.htm#damages

 

[tdude51]

@second exodus

Just so you know how strict the MPAA/RIAA is about DMCA and not breaking built in DRM/copy-protection schemes...

They actually suggested that if you want to make a copy of a video you own for fair use (in this case, educational use) you could record it playing on a TV or projection screen instead of ripping it...

http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/07/mpaa-suggests-teachers-videotape-tvs-instead-of-ripping-dvds-se/

What it all boils down to is that current copyright laws suck and help nobody. It was a very similar case with the software RealDVD. It was supposed to allow you to make 1 copy of a DVD on your computer that you could watch whenever you wanted, but it wouldn't be able to play on any other computer. Hollywood still ended up taking them to court...

http://www.engadget.com/2008/10/09/court-bans-sales-of-realdvd-indefinitely/

 

[El Jefe]

Eh, I don't 'pirate' a lot of stuff, I don't download games or music on the internet so if somehow a huge corporation finds out I have a few games on my HD that I got from friends then kudos to them.

AHEM, I'm with EA games corporation, expect a call within 72 hours.
You are being subpoenaed.

 

[second exodous]

@second exodus
What it all boils down to is that current copyright laws suck and help nobody. It was a very similar case with the software RealDVD. It was supposed to allow you to make 1 copy of a DVD on your computer that you could watch whenever you wanted, but it wouldn't be able to play on any other computer. Hollywood still ended up taking them to court...

http://www.engadget.com/2008/10/09/court-bans-sales-of-realdvd-indefinitely/

That's all I'm really trying to say, I don't see it getting any better either.

Eh, I don't 'pirate' a lot of stuff, I don't download games or music on the internet so if somehow a huge corporation finds out I have a few games on my HD that I got from friends then kudos to them.

AHEM, I'm with EA games corporation, expect a call within 72 hours.
You are being subpoenaed.

Ok, first off I need to say that I believe in supporting the people that make media that I enjoy, even though rights of content creators hasn't been brought up.

I was reading what I wrote and It sounded like I copied everything. I have a rule of thumb that I use though; if the said media still being printed then I buy it, if it has gone out of print then I copy it unless I can find it. Actually, I'm a collector of old games, I have all the ones that I loved the most as a kid and a few old games I discovered later, including Earthbound, and I don't even want to say how much I paid for that. I also never throw anything away, I have every CD/disk from every computer I ever owned so I don't need to copy anything that I'll play on the Pandora.

Edit: well, that's not true, I can't get the games off my game cartridges, but I own all the ones I want to play on the Pandora so I can justify having a ROM I downloaded.

Music, I don't listen to popular music anymore, I find it a waste of money, so I have all my 90's and early 00's music that I listen and re-listen to.

I think it's more important to support the things you love and not need every new song, game, thing, or whatever. The world has gotten too materialistic.

 

[lulzfish]

So the Pandora is legal, but second exodus is not?

 

[second exodous]

So the Pandora is legal, but second exodus is not?

I'll agree to that.

 

[MarkoeZ]

Thanks CraigIX for actually making this post read worthy

I personally will primarily use the pandora for PDA use, and be programming/playing PandoraPanic on the side. There might be some stuff floating around on my Pandora that might not be 100% legal, but, well, if look at my pc's..... well.... Ofcourse all my operating systems/programs/media etc are legal!!!!

To make my point clear: i bet 99% of the people here have at least 1 illegal or grey area program/os/music or video file on their pc. No difference on the pandora i guess.

Cheers!!!

 

[skeezix]

And second ex, the rules vary by media and licencing and so on. How you got it, what media type etc.. Books are very different to music, Which is different to movies, etc. (Example, asshole riaa equiv in Canada managed to lobby so we pay a levy on all media (blank cd and hard drives say) since we are all Assumed to be pirates andnot do real work. As such it is legal to copy music in Canada(!!) though it is amoral and unsupportive. Movies are not covered though, so a very different thing. Every country is a mess this way :/)

jeff

 

[MarkoeZ]

And second ex, the rules vary by media and licencing and so on. How you got it, what media type etc.. Books are very different to music, Which is different to movies, etc. (Example, asshole riaa equiv in Canada managed to lobby so we pay a levy on all media (blank cd and hard drives say) since we are all Assumed to be pirates andnot do real work. As such it is legal to copy music in Canada(!!) though it is amoral and unsupportive. Movies are not covered though, so a very different thing. Every country is a mess this way :/)

jeff

Hmmm, i wonder. If you allready pay a levy on those media, is it actually amoral? the way i see it you are only doing something that you have allready paid for... But i bet the law makers will disagree

 

[SirAileron]

*glances at his shelves of games*

*glances at his external hard drive*

It's true what they say, money can make a lot of things legal! My collection of ROM images got cut down drastically (and almost exclusively) to games I've ripped myself. Hell, if it were easier to rip DS and GBA games, I'd do it for those systems as well.

Ripping isn't illegal everywhere, though it should be legal to protect one's own merchandise. It's so much cheaper to replace a flash cart or the like, which usually gets regularly backed up due to interaction with personal computers, than it is to replace each individual game. This also rings true for the time you put into every save file. Backing up, storing, and distributing data is simply the way of the present, no matter if it's legal or illegal.

People will continue to find ways to do what they want. What's to say that something illegal is wrong? Last I checked, the law didn't decide on my morals.

 

[bzar]

And second ex, the rules vary by media and licencing and so on. How you got it, what media type etc.. Books are very different to music, Which is different to movies, etc. (Example, asshole riaa equiv in Canada managed to lobby so we pay a levy on all media (blank cd and hard drives say) since we are all Assumed to be pirates andnot do real work. As such it is legal to copy music in Canada(!!) though it is amoral and unsupportive. Movies are not covered though, so a very different thing. Every country is a mess this way :/)

For example here in Finland it's legal to do what second exodus described, copying music from a friend who bought it. It's even stated very clearly on the local RIAA's info page. We pay a levy too. But same as Canada, there are different laws for movies and software.

OT: Come to think of it, Finland and Canada have quite a lot in common

 

[renwils]

Having protection from big content through a tax is nice, but it shouldn't be necessary. Effectively, the publishers are using the government's force to extort the public. You don't have a choice not to pay those taxes. I don't know if this is any better or worse than here in the US, where lawyers are the ones performing the extortion, but any democratic government shouldn't be taking orders from any business. Governments must be accountable to the citizens, and businesses to governments. It seems like more often than not, the opposite is true.