ISOHUNT in trouble?

Ohhh noooo....could it be, are we under the gun of filtering as well. Could it be that our rights to freedom are under the watchful eye of our government? Some of us say that it is illegal to share this type of information on the net. How does that differ from me or you taking our purchased copy of something and lending it out or just merely giving it away. Should we have charged that person and sent monies to the copyright holders? NOT! What if I were to start up a web site asking for a donation of $1 dollar to cover the cost of shipping and I were to make free copies of every movie and game or application that I "purchased or own" and then sent out to everyone that sent a donation? Would they then go after the POSTAL system for the distribution of this information?
It is also seeming that our jurisdictions are outreaching to other countries as well. as posted in this WIRED.com article Torrent Search Engines Unlawful, U.S. Judge Says | Threat Level | Wired.com
Have there been amendments made to our Constitution or our BILL of RIGHTS that have stated that the technological information highway or "internet" be regulated by government officials in a single country or yet be regulated by those whom seem to be wanting more money(aka movie and music industries)? How is it that all these countries can come up with what seems to be individual laws regulating this? To me this should be illegal due to the fact that the "internet" is world wide and everyone or almost everyone that accesses it is a paid subscriber.
If they want to regulate it and we all know they do... they why don't our money hungry governments and movie and music companies all sit down and make a new type of Internet Constitution or Internet Bill of Rights that is regulated by one entity with no fluctuation. Or better yet come out with their own internet that they in whole operate and maintain?

What are your opinions on this? And thank you WIRED.com for the article in which I read that sparked my interest.

pparks1 said:

As far as I am concerned, Piracy is wrong. If I buy something and I give it away...then I can only give that 1 tangible thing away and I no longer have it. That's a key difference. However, if I buy a piece of software and then copy it and give it away to anybody on the net...then we all now have it and others didn't pay for it as required and aren't legally licensed. To me that is wrong.

It is in no way shape or form illegal to make copies of your own purchased materials for backup. And it is in now way shape or form illegal to give anything away that you have purchased. And I see that the paid subscription to the internet via your provider is enough to be considered as paid for. Why do they not go after our providers? They already over charge for the services they provide. These services should in their prices include the right to distribute information freely.

BWK said:

pparks1 said:

As far as I am concerned, Piracy is wrong. If I buy something and I give it away...then I can only give that 1 tangible thing away and I no longer have it. That's a key difference. However, if I buy a piece of software and then copy it and give it away to anybody on the net...then we all now have it and others didn't pay for it as required and aren't legally licensed. To me that is wrong.

It is in no way shape or form illegal to make copies of your own purchased materials for backup. And it is in now way shape or form illegal to give anything away that you have purchased. And I see that the paid subscription to the internet via your provider is enough to be considered as paid for. Why do they not go after our providers? They already over charge for the services they provide. These services should in their prices include the right to distribute information freely.

But not to steal copyrighted materials. So it is technically legal to upload these programs, but it is facilitating piracy for others.

Read the EULAs of the programs, and you will see what I mean.

So.. then in reality,we never own anything we just rent it. Since an EULA is stating that I can not do as I please with my purchased materials. It has to be under the guide lines to which they have imposed on my purchased item. I think that would be a violation to my rights as an individual. There is freedom of speech...there is freedom of press....there are so many freedoms out there but noone is willing to remember why they were made, or what they are for. Us!

Ok...since said person purchased said EULA. Would that in any way enter them into the investor category? Hence they did purchase a license to run the item. Understandably the license terms are drawn up prior to purchase.
I am in no way for or against piracy, I just do not understand how they can go after someone that is not in entity distributing anything. In essence it is to me kind of like purchasing items for a character in an online game. It's stupid to pay for something that you will never ever physically touch.
This is how I am perceiving this entire argument over internet rights and wrongs.

Stupid as anything may be, it is our duty as law-abiding citizens (by definition) to obey the laws. Grouse about them all you want, but the truth is it is wrong on an absolute scale to break our words. The EULAs specifically spell out the terms, and by using it, you are agreeing to obey them.

Break the laws if you want, but I doubt the courts will go easy on you.

sambalayne said:

assume you haven't read the rules?

Who?