On Tue, 02 Aug 2011 09:12:07 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

" wrote:

"Most of the thousands of RIAA file sharing cases against
individuals settled out of court for a few thousand dollars.
The RIAA has said it has ceased its 5-year campaign of suing
individual file sharers and, with the Motion Picture
Association of America, have convinced internet service providers
to take punitive action against copyright scofflaws, including
terminating service."

...but it's perfectly legal, eh?

In terms of copyright, you've got to look at where the actual violation
is. What specific action was done to violate the copyright of the item
in question. That almost always means some form of duplication or
transmission.

You pride yourself on your ignorance.

In terms of internet availability and downloading, the violation is the
making available of a copy of the item. Parties who access that copy
for their own personal use are not violating copyright law, but the
point is that the copy they're accessing should not exist in the first
place.

Wrong again.

But once a copy of the item is available, then it's fair game to
download.

....and dumber than a box of rocks.

DMCA provides a "safe harbor" provision, which means that if the hoster
is notified by the copyright holder to take-down the item, then there
are no legal consequences for the hoster.

Most everyone here has been downloader of copyright material at one time
or another, probably without even knowing it. Anyone who has ever
viewed a you-tube video of people singing "happy birthday" at a birthday
party was in effect illegally downloading copyrighted material.

Anyone who sings "happy birthday" (especially staff in a commercial
establishment such as a restaurant) is violating copyright law.

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.