+- Kodi Community Forum (https://forum.kodi.tv)
+-- Forum: Discussions (https://forum.kodi.tv/forumdisplay.php?fid=222)
+--- Forum: Kodi related discussions (https://forum.kodi.tv/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft (/showthread.php?tid=117995)
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - jmarshall - 2012-11-21
We don't think you should pirate free software either? :p
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - Robotica - 2012-11-21
(2012-11-21, 03:12)natethomas Wrote:(2012-11-20, 20:08)Robotica Wrote: Piracy stance is there. Will there also be a free software stance?
I'm not sure if I follow the question.
(2012-11-21, 04:05)jmarshall Wrote: We don't think you should pirate free software either? :pMaybe a relicensing policy.
Piracy stance is more about content. Content is given a lot of atattention with this stance but the software, which is more important, hasn't had.
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - Ned Scott - 2012-11-21
We have a relicensing policy. It's called the GPL.
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - leetut - 2012-11-21
(2012-03-30, 19:02)Eldorado Wrote: I'm not going to point any out by name, but taking a look at the most popular threads in the video addons forum and using a bit of common sense will tell you which ones violate the teams piracy stance as outlined here.. yet they have remained in check for weeks/months.. and some were not even touched in the initial run of thread closures
been wondering the same thing myself
some interesting info from earlier this year about (that thread) mods have always allowed, and i hope they continue to allow:
"one of the sites that had several of its domain names seized by the Feds yesterday, is furious at the US Government. Convinced that the service they are providing does not violate the law, the site continues to operate under a new domain name.
The people who operate ******** don’t live in the US, and neither are their servers located there. In fact, ******** says that their site is perfectly legal where they are based, so they will continue business as usual."
“Since we don’t live in a third-world country here, the courts decide if something is illegal not the entertainment industry lobbies. We will continue until a court decides that the site is illegal, but for now we’ve seen three court decisions on this matter that say it is not.”
********’s co-owner is referring to the court cases in Spain, where sites that merely link to copyrighted works have been declared legal. ***********, a site very similar to ********, won in Spanish courts twice.
In the US, however, things work differently. Two operators of streaming sites have already been arrested and await criminal trials. And if the domains are linked to foreigners, the US believes it has the authority to take them over if they are deemed to infringe copyrights.
This stance has raised eyebrows among foreign governments. A few months ago the European Parliament adopted a resolution which criticized US domain name seizures. According to the resolution these measures need to be countered as they endanger “the integrity of the global internet and freedom of communication.”
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - Robotica - 2012-11-22
(2012-11-21, 06:44)Ned Scott Wrote: We have a relicensing policy. It's called the GPL.
The gpl has nothing to do with relicensing since ownership is ownership , especially when there is copyright assimiment.
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - davilla - 2012-11-22
See the copyright/GPL notices on every file in xbmc's source code if you have questions about licensing XBMC source code. Now please take such discussion to another thread as this has nothing to do with this thread topic "XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft".
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - Ned Scott - 2012-11-22
I feel like I shouldn't even ask this in fear that it will just drag out, but can you just tell us what you're talking about, Robotica?
Are you saying that the only software that should be discussed on xbmc.org is free/open source software?
Are you saying that there are people "pirating" XBMC by reusing the code but not following the GPL?
Are you saying that there are XBMC developers that are dual licensing their code to the GPL and something else? (which is perfectly fine, if so)
Are you saying that users are breaking the EULA of some software?
I really have no idea what you are talking about, or what this has to do with either piracy or any kind of policy stance.
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - Death-Axe - 2012-11-25
I just find it interesting that even "team XBMC" members are also doing as the rest of us and downloading movies. (I'll not say who, but they said they where watching the dark knight rises, which isn't out until December, but is available for downloading).
I don't think your statement can be taken seriously at all when you guys yourselves are pirating movies.
Just sayin'.
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - ronie - 2012-11-26
what each of us does in their private lives has 0 to do with running a public forum.
now please go find some other forum where people might appreciate your private detective aspirations.
k, thx.
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - PobjoySpecial - 2012-11-26
...
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - Ned Scott - 2012-11-26
(2012-11-25, 23:51)Death-Axe Wrote: I just find it interesting that even "team XBMC" members are also doing as the rest of us and downloading movies. (I'll not say who, but they said they where watching the dark knight rises, which isn't out until December, but is available for downloading).
I don't think your statement can be taken seriously at all when you guys yourselves are pirating movies.
Just sayin'.
What you don't understand is that the piracy policy is not a moral stance.
None of us care if you pirate movies or not. If it was just the occasional thread here and there about Icefilms or 1channe, I doubt anyone would care (like they did for years). What became an issue was that it started to hit critical mass, where we could realistically be seen as supporting piracy, rather than being indifferent/neutral. The number of users for those add-ons became huge, and the spotlight became too bright.
For the sake of XBMC as an organization and even for the sake of those add-ons, we needed to make it clear that the two were not officially connected. People actually thought the that these were core features of XBMC. There's a whole list of reasons on why this is bad that we've already dove into in this thread.
XBMC itself needs to be neutral. What users or even team members do is entirely different. We're trying to protect the XBMC project, and that's all.
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - prawnee - 2012-11-26
(2012-11-25, 23:51)Death-Axe Wrote: but they said they where watching the dark knight rises, which isn't out until December, but is available for downloading).
Really? cos I'm holding the blu ray in my hands as we speak.
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - leetut - 2012-11-26
so that explains why my thread titled:
1channel putlocker/sockshare issues was immediately dumped into the garbage bin by "martijn"
who then decided to ignore my pm asking for an explanation why, (because im beneath him? maybe?)
so if id titled it "putlocker/sockshare" issues would it have been allowed?
when i first came to xbmc (2 years ago!!!!) it was for free skytv
personally i "actually thought the that these were core features of XBMC"
before i even knew what 1ch or icefilms or navi-x was (i learned about all of those here!)
a quick look on ebay-UK for appletv2 and almost every picture says "XBMC FREE SKYTV"
yet talk of that is still a daily occurrence here
is that legal? im just asking, i honestly dont know
and..
"We're trying to protect the XBMC project, and that's all."
if 1ch and ice films and the other "questionable" addons we still allow disappeared
pretty sure the XBMC project would be dead pretty quickly
the 2 are totally connected in my eyes, and the eyes of every one on ebay selling appletv2's
things like youtube bbciplayer ect are all now pretty much standard on smart tv's or freeview / youview type boxes
ive used a humax hdr fox t2 for the past few years for that kind of thing
not complaining just sharing a view
you all do a great job here
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - thrak76 - 2012-11-26
(2012-11-26, 16:02)leetut Wrote: if 1ch and ice films and the other "questionable" addons we still allow disappeared
pretty sure the XBMC project would be dead pretty quickly
the 2 are totally connected in my eyes, and the eyes of every one on ebay selling appletv2's
I'd wager the majority of XBMC users set it up with local content (be they their own rips, or whatever), rather than rely on unreliable streaming addons. Local content is also the primary focus of the XBMC project. It would survive very well indeed without these "gray" addons.
RE: XBMC's Piracy Stance: Draft - Saner - 2012-11-26
(2012-11-26, 16:02)leetut Wrote: so that explains why my thread titled:
1channel putlocker/sockshare issues was immediately dumped into the garbage bin by "martijn"
who then decided to ignore my pm asking for an explanation why, (because im beneath him? maybe?)
so if id titled it "putlocker/sockshare" issues would it have been allowed?
when i first came to xbmc (2 years ago!!!!) it was for free skytv
personally i "actually thought the that these were core features of XBMC"
before i even knew what 1ch or icefilms or navi-x was (i learned about all of those here!)
a quick look on ebay-UK for appletv2 and almost every picture says "XBMC FREE SKYTV"
yet talk of that is still a daily occurrence here
is that legal? im just asking, i honestly dont know
and..
"We're trying to protect the XBMC project, and that's all."
if 1ch and ice films and the other "questionable" addons we still allow disappeared
pretty sure the XBMC project would be dead pretty quickly
the 2 are totally connected in my eyes, and the eyes of every one on ebay selling appletv2's
things like youtube bbciplayer ect are all now pretty much standard on smart tv's or freeview / youview type boxes
ive used a humax hdr fox t2 for the past few years for that kind of thing
not complaining just sharing a view
you all do a great job here
Dont be silly.