30,000 videos on YouTube removed

[miokomioko]

hyopcrite

You're making some obnoxious assumptions about myself and others torrenting films and/or MP3s. If you want to call me a hypocrite because you assume I illegally download music and movies, you're just a presumptuous imbecile trying to stir shit with people (who's also wrong, but I really couldn't care less if some kid online believes me about that). If you want to label me a hypocrite because I've taken advantage of a hugely popular public website that hosts videos and viewed a TV show I've seen before and actually have purchased on DVD, then that's the real dispute here. I really wish you'd "fall over dead" if you can't believe that there's indeed some people out there that don't actually download illegally distributed material.

[Tyche]

hyopcrite

You're making some obnoxious assumptions about myself and others torrenting films and/or MP3s. If you want to call me a hypocrite because you assume I illegally download music and movies, you're just a presumptuous imbecile trying to stir shit with people (who's also wrong, but I really couldn't care less if some kid online believes me about that). If you want to label me a hypocrite because I've taken advantage of a hugely popular public website that hosts videos and viewed a TV show I've seen before and actually have purchased on DVD, then that's the real dispute here. I really wish you'd "fall over dead" if you can't believe that there's indeed some people out there that don't actually download illegally distributed material.

My assumptions may be abnoxious to you, if you're in the what, .01% (that's probably a high assumption) of the internet population who follows every single regulation and legislation that has been put on the internet. I guess that makes me an imbecile and a "kid". I call you a hypocrite because you think it's OK to reciceve stolen property, but it's COMPLETELY ILLEGAL AND IMMORAL to steal property.

Edit:

How can you not find this ironic.

"Someone steals from a bank and gives everyone free money. If I take it, that doesn't make me a supporter of robbery, and doesn't make me a thief either. I'm just benefitting, and people will benefit regardless of whether I take it or not, I would just be stupid not to. "

So you're playing the "Well, if i don't do it, someone else will, so i might as well benefit"

Yet

You think that its OMG SO WRONG to download MP3's and view vids on the internet, so much, to the point that you will not watch/listen any copywrited material on the internet. Guess, what, like i said in my first post, the internet is what it is. If you don't watch it or download it, there are thousands and thousands of others that will benefit from it. It's the same thing, except in one instance (in real life) you are benefitting (by getting free money), but on the internet, where your business soars, it's completely wrong and immoral because you may lose money.

[6souls]

i use http://www.dailymotion.com/ regular vids & porno. one stop viewing.

[Vannis]

Could anyone fill me in on this torrent stuff o.O where to get one and where to get anime for it and such like naruto, and bleach?
Ive been watching it all on youtube ><;

[miokomioko]

stuff

You're trying to discredit people's opinions on this YouTube matter by saying they are just as bad as the people who actually do the ripping and uploading the shows/movies to post them publicly on the internet because they have themselves viewed said materials on YouTube.

Whatever your morals are on the subject have nothing to do with whether people viewing YouTube-hosted material has any effect on any of the copyright holders' prospective markets. When something is displayed publicly, people who view it are not responsible for shit. It's public. There's two people responsible in this case 1: the asshole publicly displaying copyrighted material on the internet and 2: YouTube who was doing a horrible job at carrying out their takedown provisions.

You're apparently trying to compare browsing YouTube hosted streaming videos(which actually has more un-copyrighted material than anything) with actively seeking out copyrighted material to download permanently to your harddrive to collect, such as music and movies.

That's still retarded and I'm done arguing about it.

[Lawls]

stuff

You're trying to discredit people's opinions on this YouTube matter by saying they are just as bad as the people who actually do the ripping and uploading the shows/movies to post them publicly on the internet because they have themselves viewed said materials on YouTube.

Whatever your morals are on the subject have nothing to do with whether people viewing YouTube-hosted material has any effect on any of the copyright holders' prospective markets. When something is displayed publicly, people who view it are not responsible for shit. It's public. There's two people responsible in this case 1: the asshole publicly displaying copyrighted material on the internet and 2: YouTube who was doing a horrible job at carrying out their takedown provisions.

You're apparently trying to compare browsing YouTube hosted streaming videos(which actually has more un-copyrighted material than anything) with actively seeking out copyrighted material to download permanently to your harddrive to collect, such as music and movies.

That's still retarded and I'm done arguing about it.

If everyone else is doing it, then it's probably the right thing to do. Fact of life.

[Tyche]

stuff

You're trying to discredit people's opinions on this YouTube matter by saying they are just as bad as the people who actually do the ripping and uploading the shows/movies to post them publicly on the internet because they have themselves viewed said materials on YouTube.

Whatever your morals are on the subject have nothing to do with whether people viewing YouTube-hosted material has any effect on any of the copyright holders' prospective markets. When something is displayed publicly, people who view it are not responsible for shit. It's public. There's two people responsible in this case 1: the asshole publicly displaying copyrighted material on the internet and 2: YouTube who was doing a horrible job at carrying out their takedown provisions.

You're apparently trying to compare browsing YouTube hosted streaming videos(which actually has more un-copyrighted material than anything) with actively seeking out copyrighted material to download permanently to your harddrive to collect, such as music and movies.

That's still retarded and I'm done arguing about it.

If everyone else is doing it, then it's probably the right thing to do. Fact of life.

The bolded part is incorrect. Do you read the publications that you post? You do realize people are arrested and charged for downloading copywrited public material all the time? The charge may not be as hefty as the hoster, but it is illegal, and they are responsible. Im kind of lost in translation however...first you say that you don't view youtube illegally (you own the DVDs), then you say "well, it's ok to view it, just not to rip it". It seems every post you make is full of contradictions (of yourself) and hypocrisy.

[miokomioko]

stuff

You're trying to discredit people's opinions on this YouTube matter by saying they are just as bad as the people who actually do the ripping and uploading the shows/movies to post them publicly on the internet because they have themselves viewed said materials on YouTube.

Whatever your morals are on the subject have nothing to do with whether people viewing YouTube-hosted material has any effect on any of the copyright holders' prospective markets. When something is displayed publicly, people who view it are not responsible for shit. It's public. There's two people responsible in this case 1: the asshole publicly displaying copyrighted material on the internet and 2: YouTube who was doing a horrible job at carrying out their takedown provisions.

You're apparently trying to compare browsing YouTube hosted streaming videos(which actually has more un-copyrighted material than anything) with actively seeking out copyrighted material to download permanently to your harddrive to collect, such as music and movies.

That's still retarded and I'm done arguing about it.

If everyone else is doing it, then it's probably the right thing to do. Fact of life.

The bolded part is incorrect. Do you read the publications that you post? You do realize people are arrested and charged for downloading copywrited public material all the time? The charge may not be as hefty as the hoster, but it is illegal, and they are responsible. Im kind of lost in translation however...first you say that you don't view youtube illegally (you own the DVDs), then you say "well, it's ok to view it, just not to rip it". It seems every post you make is full of contradictions (of yourself) and hypocrisy.

It is not incorrect because you don't seem to understand that viewing isn't the same as copying. Viewing someone's photographs that are illegally displayed somewhere is not the same as slapping it down in a Xerox machine to take a copy home and frame.

You need to comprehend that there is indeed a difference between viewing something that's displayed publicly (whether it be anime posted on a public website or a photograph pasted on a billboard) and downloading illegally distributed material (such as connecting to a P2P server and seeking out and creating COPIES of the work from others).

My mention of myself owning the DVDs of the material I've viewed on YouTube (specifically Futurama episodes) was just in response to your generalizations that viewing stuff on YouTube is just as illegal as uploading it.

With your logic, everyone who looked at the advertisement poster for Naked Gun 33 1/3 is a thief and knew they were looking at copyright infringement (be it 'fair use' under the guise of 'parody' or not) of Annie Leibovitz's famous portrait of a pregnant Demi Moore that was on the cover of the best selling issue of Vanity Fair. They are just as responsible for viewing the poster and just as much of a criminal as Paramount Pictures for hiring a photographer to mimic the portrait after being refused a license by Leibovitz.

Anyhow, as I said, I'm through arguing about this with you. So go ahead and get your last word in, or whatever it is that you need to do.

[Stilgar]

John Q. Law believes that if you acquire property that you know to be stolen, you are as guilty as the person who stole it.

[Lawls]

Anytime you view anything on the internet, you are "downloading" it.

[miokomioko]

John Q. Law believes that if you acquire property that you know to be stolen, you are as guilty as the person who stole it.

We were not talking about stolen property, we were talking about copyrights.

Anytime you view anything on the internet, you are "downloading" it.

Technically, perhaps, but in this context you're wrong.

[perdition]

Was bound to happen, but the streaming piracy that was youtube is what made it interesting, bleh nobody wants to see those lame ass video blogs anyway. Good things never last for long ;;.

Oh.. and there is a convenience to watching some anime on youtube streaming I am not a fan of downloading a 200+ meg file to my harddrive.