Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act
-
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
If you are really that paranoid, you can use a raspberry pi, android device, or fire tv for this. Whenever you configure the device, unplug your internet connection from your router. Copy the roms and emulators to the device (only the ones you own of course
). Then create a rule on your router to block all outgoing traffic from your device.Although hundreds of thousands of people all over the world (maybe more) use emulators and roms all the time without issue.
Right but the point is there is no legal way of doing it. It's stupid
There is, it's "live outside the US."
-
@scottalanmiller said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
If you are really that paranoid, you can use a raspberry pi, android device, or fire tv for this. Whenever you configure the device, unplug your internet connection from your router. Copy the roms and emulators to the device (only the ones you own of course
). Then create a rule on your router to block all outgoing traffic from your device.Although hundreds of thousands of people all over the world (maybe more) use emulators and roms all the time without issue.
Right but the point is there is no legal way of doing it. It's stupid
There is, it's "live outside the US."
England allows you to break DRM if its only for your personal use and you own whatever you are breaking. Seems so simple to me.
-
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I understand where you are coming from @wirestyle22 , but the world isn't a pure place. These companies treat people like dirt and all they see is $$$.
Let's look at this another way... Imagine some software is developed in 1991. Alot of costs and development went into this software and it was pretty good for its time. This software was a big hit and really sold well from 1991-1994. The company made some good money and more than covered their development costs. In 1993 this same company starts developing new software and the developers move towards this new product. This trend continues till 2016...
It would be absolutely ludicrous for a software company to invest time or money into trying to prevent piracy on their 1991 software. This software had no further development after 1991 and has absolutely no support. No one in their right mind would purchase it and no one in their right mind would demand that they receive royalties on it.
Right but then its like some weird honor among thieves system where they are like, we aren't really going to invest money into going after you but you're still breaking the law.
-
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I understand where you are coming from @wirestyle22 , but the world isn't a pure place. These companies treat people like dirt and all they see is $$$.
Let's look at this another way... Imagine some software is developed in 1991. Alot of costs and development went into this software and it was pretty good for its time. This software was a big hit and really sold well from 1991-1994. The company made some good money and more than covered their development costs. In 1993 this same company starts developing new software and the developers move towards this new product. This trend continues till 2016...
It would be absolutely ludicrous for a software company to invest time or money into trying to prevent piracy on their 1991 software. This software had no further development after 1991 and has absolutely no support. No one in their right mind would purchase it and no one in their right mind would demand that they receive royalties on it.
Also, while the US makes things like this "illegal", it also makes, in most cases, the punishment dependent on the damages. So let's say you pirate something from me that earns me zero dollars. Sure, it's illegal. But you might only have to pay be double what I lost, which is nothing. So I might win a court settlement... of zero dollars. You are clearly "in the wrong", but it's a technicality.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I understand where you are coming from @wirestyle22 , but the world isn't a pure place. These companies treat people like dirt and all they see is $$$.
Let's look at this another way... Imagine some software is developed in 1991. Alot of costs and development went into this software and it was pretty good for its time. This software was a big hit and really sold well from 1991-1994. The company made some good money and more than covered their development costs. In 1993 this same company starts developing new software and the developers move towards this new product. This trend continues till 2016...
It would be absolutely ludicrous for a software company to invest time or money into trying to prevent piracy on their 1991 software. This software had no further development after 1991 and has absolutely no support. No one in their right mind would purchase it and no one in their right mind would demand that they receive royalties on it.
Also, while the US makes things like this "illegal", it also makes, in most cases, the punishment dependent on the damages. So let's say you pirate something from me that earns me zero dollars. Sure, it's illegal. But you might only have to pay be double what I lost, which is nothing. So I might win a court settlement... of zero dollars. You are clearly "in the wrong", but it's a technicality.
right and in that case no one is going to spend a dime in resources to come after you.
-
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I understand where you are coming from @wirestyle22 , but the world isn't a pure place. These companies treat people like dirt and all they see is $$$.
Let's look at this another way... Imagine some software is developed in 1991. Alot of costs and development went into this software and it was pretty good for its time. This software was a big hit and really sold well from 1991-1994. The company made some good money and more than covered their development costs. In 1993 this same company starts developing new software and the developers move towards this new product. This trend continues till 2016...
It would be absolutely ludicrous for a software company to invest time or money into trying to prevent piracy on their 1991 software. This software had no further development after 1991 and has absolutely no support. No one in their right mind would purchase it and no one in their right mind would demand that they receive royalties on it.
Right but then its like some weird honor among thieves system where they are like, we aren't really going to invest money into going after you but you're still breaking the law.
The law is morally wrong here, just like it is in many cases. Look at the Patriot Act. That is about as wrong as it gets.
-
I see what you guys are saying and that is the way I operate currently. I just don't think I should need to. It's sad.
-
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I see what you guys are saying and that is the way I operate currently. I just don't think I should need to. It's sad.
Do you turn yourself in to the police if you accidentally go 1mph above the speed limit?
What you need to realize is that government and law officials generally make the law cater to either their needs or corporation needs. Even though they have written the law in their own favor, even they rarely follow the law. Politicians and law officials are about corrupt as it comes.
My point is there is not a single person without sin (nothing about religion here. Just a fact.) Usually the ones that write and enforce the laws are among the worst offenders.
-
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I see what you guys are saying and that is the way I operate currently. I just don't think I should need to. It's sad.
Yup, pretty sad. But the US has a very high rate of corruption and making all citizens "criminals" so that they can always charge you if they want to is part of how they operate. Everything is illegal in some way, they can safely find something to arrest you for if they want. Sure, they never arrested anyone else for that thing, but it's how they work in the US.
It's amazing, but having lived in places famous for corruption, I can tell you that nothing comes close to the US. It's just different types of corruption and, as I've said a bit, Americans are desensitized to it. In places like Nicaragua, it's in your face and obvious and you feel like there is corruption. In the US, we are told so much that there is no corruption that we start to believe it, even when impacted every day by it. Much of the third world has micro-corruption all over due to a lack of oversight. The US has macro-corruption caused by institutional corruption from the top.
-
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I see what you guys are saying and that is the way I operate currently. I just don't think I should need to. It's sad.
Do you turn yourself in to the police if you accidentally go 1mph above the speed limit?
What you need to realize is that government and law officials generally make the law cater to either their needs or corporation needs. Even though they have written the law in their own favor, even they rarely follow the law. Politicians and law officials are about corrupt as it comes.
My point is there is not a single person without sin (nothing about religion here. Just a fact.) Usually the ones that write and enforce the laws are among the worst offenders.
I'd say going 1 mph above the speed limit is still a risk. A police officer can still pull me over for that and be in the right legally. I think there is a range of what I can consider to be low risk, but that doesn't mean its zero. The only zero risk scenario is doing nothing, which is completely lame and annoying.
-
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I see what you guys are saying and that is the way I operate currently. I just don't think I should need to. It's sad.
Do you turn yourself in to the police if you accidentally go 1mph above the speed limit?
What you need to realize is that government and law officials generally make the law cater to either their needs or corporation needs. Even though they have written the law in their own favor, even they rarely follow the law. Politicians and law officials are about corrupt as it comes.
My point is there is not a single person without sin (nothing about religion here. Just a fact.) Usually the ones that write and enforce the laws are among the worst offenders.
I'd say going 1 mph above the speed limit is still a risk. A police officer can still pull me over for that and be in the right legally. I think there is a range of what I can consider to be low risk, but that doesn't mean its zero. The only zero risk scenario is doing nothing, which is completely lame and annoying.
You need to trust the government's judgement to consider it a risk. What if the speed limit is 25mph in a rural wide open area. Are you still at risk if you go 26mph? Or are you just in risk of getting caught?
-
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I see what you guys are saying and that is the way I operate currently. I just don't think I should need to. It's sad.
Do you turn yourself in to the police if you accidentally go 1mph above the speed limit?
What you need to realize is that government and law officials generally make the law cater to either their needs or corporation needs. Even though they have written the law in their own favor, even they rarely follow the law. Politicians and law officials are about corrupt as it comes.
My point is there is not a single person without sin (nothing about religion here. Just a fact.) Usually the ones that write and enforce the laws are among the worst offenders.
I'd say going 1 mph above the speed limit is still a risk. A police officer can still pull me over for that and be in the right legally. I think there is a range of what I can consider to be low risk, but that doesn't mean its zero. The only zero risk scenario is doing nothing, which is completely lame and annoying.
You need to trust the government's judgement to consider it a risk. What if the speed limit is 25mph in a rural wide open area. Are you still at risk if you go 26mph? Or are you just in risk of getting caught?
It's a risk because regardless of what I believe there is a consequence
-
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I see what you guys are saying and that is the way I operate currently. I just don't think I should need to. It's sad.
Do you turn yourself in to the police if you accidentally go 1mph above the speed limit?
What you need to realize is that government and law officials generally make the law cater to either their needs or corporation needs. Even though they have written the law in their own favor, even they rarely follow the law. Politicians and law officials are about corrupt as it comes.
My point is there is not a single person without sin (nothing about religion here. Just a fact.) Usually the ones that write and enforce the laws are among the worst offenders.
I'd say going 1 mph above the speed limit is still a risk. A police officer can still pull me over for that and be in the right legally. I think there is a range of what I can consider to be low risk, but that doesn't mean its zero. The only zero risk scenario is doing nothing, which is completely lame and annoying.
Depends on the state. In Texas you are only able to be puled over if you are endangering people regardless of the speed.
-
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I see what you guys are saying and that is the way I operate currently. I just don't think I should need to. It's sad.
Do you turn yourself in to the police if you accidentally go 1mph above the speed limit?
What you need to realize is that government and law officials generally make the law cater to either their needs or corporation needs. Even though they have written the law in their own favor, even they rarely follow the law. Politicians and law officials are about corrupt as it comes.
My point is there is not a single person without sin (nothing about religion here. Just a fact.) Usually the ones that write and enforce the laws are among the worst offenders.
I'd say going 1 mph above the speed limit is still a risk. A police officer can still pull me over for that and be in the right legally. I think there is a range of what I can consider to be low risk, but that doesn't mean its zero. The only zero risk scenario is doing nothing, which is completely lame and annoying.
You need to trust the government's judgement to consider it a risk. What if the speed limit is 25mph in a rural wide open area. Are you still at risk if you go 26mph? Or are you just in risk of getting caught?
It's a risk because regardless of what I believe there is a consequence
There are consequences to going the speed limit too.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I see what you guys are saying and that is the way I operate currently. I just don't think I should need to. It's sad.
Do you turn yourself in to the police if you accidentally go 1mph above the speed limit?
What you need to realize is that government and law officials generally make the law cater to either their needs or corporation needs. Even though they have written the law in their own favor, even they rarely follow the law. Politicians and law officials are about corrupt as it comes.
My point is there is not a single person without sin (nothing about religion here. Just a fact.) Usually the ones that write and enforce the laws are among the worst offenders.
I'd say going 1 mph above the speed limit is still a risk. A police officer can still pull me over for that and be in the right legally. I think there is a range of what I can consider to be low risk, but that doesn't mean its zero. The only zero risk scenario is doing nothing, which is completely lame and annoying.
You need to trust the government's judgement to consider it a risk. What if the speed limit is 25mph in a rural wide open area. Are you still at risk if you go 26mph? Or are you just in risk of getting caught?
It's a risk because regardless of what I believe there is a consequence
There are consequences to going the speed limit too.
That reminds me of my old Executive Director. She opened up questions about people needing to go 55 mph and maintain the speed limit on the Garden State Parkway (which I know you've driven on @scottalanmiller ). I asked why we're made to go the speed limit when it's 20-30 mph slower that the rest of traffic and that in defensive driving courses they teach you to go with the flow of traffic even though it may be over the speed limit. Going slower is just as dangerous as going faster.
Nothing was ever done.
-
-
It's an interesting topic. Thanks for talking to me guys. Once Westworld comes back I won't have the luxury of even thinking about this because I'll be filled with existential dread. I still love that show.
-
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@scottalanmiller said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I see what you guys are saying and that is the way I operate currently. I just don't think I should need to. It's sad.
Do you turn yourself in to the police if you accidentally go 1mph above the speed limit?
What you need to realize is that government and law officials generally make the law cater to either their needs or corporation needs. Even though they have written the law in their own favor, even they rarely follow the law. Politicians and law officials are about corrupt as it comes.
My point is there is not a single person without sin (nothing about religion here. Just a fact.) Usually the ones that write and enforce the laws are among the worst offenders.
I'd say going 1 mph above the speed limit is still a risk. A police officer can still pull me over for that and be in the right legally. I think there is a range of what I can consider to be low risk, but that doesn't mean its zero. The only zero risk scenario is doing nothing, which is completely lame and annoying.
You need to trust the government's judgement to consider it a risk. What if the speed limit is 25mph in a rural wide open area. Are you still at risk if you go 26mph? Or are you just in risk of getting caught?
It's a risk because regardless of what I believe there is a consequence
There are consequences to going the speed limit too.
That reminds me of my old Executive Director. She opened up questions about people needing to go 55 mph and maintain the speed limit on the Garden State Parkway (which I know you've driven on @scottalanmiller ). I asked why we're made to go the speed limit when it's 20-30 mph slower that the rest of traffic and that in defensive driving courses they teach you to go with the flow of traffic even though it may be over the speed limit. Going slower is just as dangerous as going faster.
Nothing was ever done.
In NY the law is "be safe" and it overrides all other laws.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@scottalanmiller said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@IRJ said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
I see what you guys are saying and that is the way I operate currently. I just don't think I should need to. It's sad.
Do you turn yourself in to the police if you accidentally go 1mph above the speed limit?
What you need to realize is that government and law officials generally make the law cater to either their needs or corporation needs. Even though they have written the law in their own favor, even they rarely follow the law. Politicians and law officials are about corrupt as it comes.
My point is there is not a single person without sin (nothing about religion here. Just a fact.) Usually the ones that write and enforce the laws are among the worst offenders.
I'd say going 1 mph above the speed limit is still a risk. A police officer can still pull me over for that and be in the right legally. I think there is a range of what I can consider to be low risk, but that doesn't mean its zero. The only zero risk scenario is doing nothing, which is completely lame and annoying.
You need to trust the government's judgement to consider it a risk. What if the speed limit is 25mph in a rural wide open area. Are you still at risk if you go 26mph? Or are you just in risk of getting caught?
It's a risk because regardless of what I believe there is a consequence
There are consequences to going the speed limit too.
That reminds me of my old Executive Director. She opened up questions about people needing to go 55 mph and maintain the speed limit on the Garden State Parkway (which I know you've driven on @scottalanmiller ). I asked why we're made to go the speed limit when it's 20-30 mph slower that the rest of traffic and that in defensive driving courses they teach you to go with the flow of traffic even though it may be over the speed limit. Going slower is just as dangerous as going faster.
Nothing was ever done.
In NY the law is "be safe" and it overrides all other laws.
Apparently NJ doesn't work that way. Kind of like how you need to make 3 rights to make a left
-
@wirestyle22 said in Gaming and the Digital Millenium Copyright Act:
Kind of like how you need to make 3 rights to make a left
it is way safer to not cross traffic.
