Re: Basgooner
Posted: Sun Apr 14, 2019 3:00 pm
There's a whole three or four paragraphs in response but it's going so far off topic and into the intricacies of copyright, fair use and monetisation involving legislation before and after the rules were relaxed/changed a few years ago, how you need to credit the copyright owner if you are claiming fair use and also how YouTube sometimes doesn't detect copyrighted material via it's content ID system if it's a short clip or has been incorporated into a frame. Can't be arsed because it in no way changes the principal or the argument.
You mean the argument someone who was allowed to promote his illegal DVDs on here has appeared in Crown Court, pleaded guilty and will be sentenced in 11 days time?nikkiboy wrote:There's a whole three or four paragraphs in response but it's going so far off topic and into the intricacies of copyright, fair use and monetisation involving legislation before and after the rules were relaxed/changed a few years ago, how you need to credit the copyright owner if you are claiming fair use and also how YouTube sometimes doesn't detect copyrighted material via it's content ID system if it's a short clip or has been incorporated into a frame. Can't be arsed because it in no way changes the principal or the argument.
No I mean the truth, as in someone had a web link in his signature like you do which like yours linked to copyrighted material being broadcasted or distributed by someone who is not the owner of that copyright.Ginge wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:22 pmYou mean the argument someone who was allowed to promote his illegal DVDs on here has appeared in Crown Court, pleaded guilty and will be sentenced in 11 days time?nikkiboy wrote:There's a whole three or four paragraphs in response but it's going so far off topic and into the intricacies of copyright, fair use and monetisation involving legislation before and after the rules were relaxed/changed a few years ago, how you need to credit the copyright owner if you are claiming fair use and also how YouTube sometimes doesn't detect copyrighted material via it's content ID system if it's a short clip or has been incorporated into a frame. Can't be arsed because it in no way changes the principal or the argument.
Report me then and see if i appear in Crown Court.nikkiboy wrote:No I mean the truth, as in someone had a web link in his signature like you do which like yours linked to copyrighted material being broadcasted or distributed by someone who is not the owner of that copyright.Ginge wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:22 pmYou mean the argument someone who was allowed to promote his illegal DVDs on here has appeared in Crown Court, pleaded guilty and will be sentenced in 11 days time?nikkiboy wrote:There's a whole three or four paragraphs in response but it's going so far off topic and into the intricacies of copyright, fair use and monetisation involving legislation before and after the rules were relaxed/changed a few years ago, how you need to credit the copyright owner if you are claiming fair use and also how YouTube sometimes doesn't detect copyrighted material via it's content ID system if it's a short clip or has been incorporated into a frame. Can't be arsed because it in no way changes the principal or the argument.
Are you still crying?Ginge wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:35 pmReport me then and see if i appear in Crown Court.nikkiboy wrote:No I mean the truth, as in someone had a web link in his signature like you do which like yours linked to copyrighted material being broadcasted or distributed by someone who is not the owner of that copyright.Ginge wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:22 pmYou mean the argument someone who was allowed to promote his illegal DVDs on here has appeared in Crown Court, pleaded guilty and will be sentenced in 11 days time?nikkiboy wrote:There's a whole three or four paragraphs in response but it's going so far off topic and into the intricacies of copyright, fair use and monetisation involving legislation before and after the rules were relaxed/changed a few years ago, how you need to credit the copyright owner if you are claiming fair use and also how YouTube sometimes doesn't detect copyrighted material via it's content ID system if it's a short clip or has been incorporated into a frame. Can't be arsed because it in no way changes the principal or the argument.
Why would I report you? You are not the one infringing copyright.Ginge wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:35 pmReport me then and see if i appear in Crown Court.nikkiboy wrote:No I mean the truth, as in someone had a web link in his signature like you do which like yours linked to copyrighted material being broadcasted or distributed by someone who is not the owner of that copyright.Ginge wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:22 pmYou mean the argument someone who was allowed to promote his illegal DVDs on here has appeared in Crown Court, pleaded guilty and will be sentenced in 11 days time?nikkiboy wrote:There's a whole three or four paragraphs in response but it's going so far off topic and into the intricacies of copyright, fair use and monetisation involving legislation before and after the rules were relaxed/changed a few years ago, how you need to credit the copyright owner if you are claiming fair use and also how YouTube sometimes doesn't detect copyrighted material via it's content ID system if it's a short clip or has been incorporated into a frame. Can't be arsed because it in no way changes the principal or the argument.
Im ok thanks. Im just glad that justice has finally been done, mate.nikkiboy wrote:Why would I report you? You are not the one infringing copyright.Ginge wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:35 pmReport me then and see if i appear in Crown Court.nikkiboy wrote:No I mean the truth, as in someone had a web link in his signature like you do which like yours linked to copyrighted material being broadcasted or distributed by someone who is not the owner of that copyright.Ginge wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:22 pmYou mean the argument someone who was allowed to promote his illegal DVDs on here has appeared in Crown Court, pleaded guilty and will be sentenced in 11 days time?nikkiboy wrote: There's a whole three or four paragraphs in response but it's going so far off topic and into the intricacies of copyright, fair use and monetisation involving legislation before and after the rules were relaxed/changed a few years ago, how you need to credit the copyright owner if you are claiming fair use and also how YouTube sometimes doesn't detect copyrighted material via it's content ID system if it's a short clip or has been incorporated into a frame. Can't be arsed because it in no way changes the principal or the argument.
You really are struggling with this aren't you, do you want me to ask Oche to explain it to you?
I couldn’t care less about defending anyone, I’m mearly telling you that the couple of paragraphs you wrote to try and make some obscure point to him was complete bollocks
Why?Zapp Brannigan wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 5:32 pm and you was an idiot for letting him advertise it on here.
Just re-read this, complete bollocks?Zapp Brannigan wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 5:32 pmI couldn’t care less about defending anyone, I’m mearly telling you that the couple of paragraphs you wrote to try and make some obscure point to him was complete bollocks
If you want me to get back on topic basgooner was an idiot for what he was doing and how blatantly he was doing it (and how he spoke to people) and you was an idiot for letting him advertise it on here.
Indeed. In the meantime im just setting up my animal porn website. Will be putting a link in my sig at some point.BlueSpark wrote:Be interesting to see the sentence.
I would be more worried with the Proceeds of Crime order than the prison time.
Oh i know it was before you were around. But we have established that having a link to a website in your signature isnt the site allowing an advert, so once its all setup ill amend my sig.BlueSpark wrote:Well all this occurred from before I was a moderator and indeed before I even joined here.
A great read though, this thread.