Piracy is not a crime - ITWeb

Voicy

Voicy

Resident Panty Kicker
The Business Software Alliance's (BSA) efforts are being thwarted by a three decades-old law, as the organisation tries to clamp down on piracy and stop money leaking out of the economy.

As the law stands, end-user piracy is not a crime and is difficult to enforce as an infringement of copyright law. This law dates back to 1978 and the maximum fine that can be imposed on someone selling pirated software is R5 000 per ripped copy.
adlog.php


The BSA says this is not enough, and penalties need to be harsher in order to trim the amount of piracy in SA. The latest figures from the IDC show that piracy went up a percentage point in SA between 2007 and 2008, which amounted to R3.1 billion in industry losses.

Not important
ICT lawyer Lance Michalson, founder of Michalsons Attorneys, says piracy is a copyright violation, but it is not a crime. As a result, the owner of the copyright can only enforce a claim of copyright infringement.

The reason that piracy is not a crime, which makes offenders difficult to fine and penalise under South African law, is because there is no relevant law in place. This has been the situation for several years, he adds.

Under current law, Michalson explains, it is an offence to knowingly infringe a copyright, but many people who do this are not aware that they have. In addition, the will to prosecute people who rip off software is not a focus area for the authorities, he says.

On its Web site, the Electronic Law Consultancy spells out the issue: “The big secret is out: software piracy is not a crime when done for private or individual use, and the worst that can happen to the software pirate is he or she may be sued for the value of the licence he or she should have paid... Piracy is not theft, because theft is a crime, piracy is a copyright violation, and only under certain circumstances is this copyright violation a crime.”

Warren Weertman, at Bowman Gilfillan, who acts on behalf of the BSA, says the current Act does not sufficiently spell out piracy, and requires some interpretation in order to be enforced.
Click to expand...
More...

Your views?
 
Doesn't stop them from changing the law at a later date and then coming down on offenders like a ton of bricks. Of course, they can't do anything about what was done before the law was changed. Once larger companies start focusing their attention down here - we are an emerging market after all - they can start applying pressure and those laws WILL be changed.

Just look at what happened to Pirate Bay - and they were just a facilitator.

I'll keep buying my nice shiny boxes, thanks.
 
Strifehart said:
Well then perhaps they should just change the damn archaic law and make piracy a punishable offense.
Click to expand...

Question Have you even considered that if it was that easy it would have been done by now .

Copyright infringement has many layers and laws that bind .
 
Venom said:
Question Have you even considered that if it was that easy it would have been done by now .

Copyright infringement has many layers and laws that bind .
Click to expand...

Laws with more far reaching effects get passed all the time. It's a question of it not being a priority, that's all.
 
well it's all fine and dandy to make piracy a criminal offence. But consider the negative effects of that not only the pirates, who can be ignored with this arguement, but the legitimate customers. Anybody hear about the story of the major bread companies who banded to gether to shoot up all there prices? Well if the game/software companies can get that sort of controll it's going to cause some major issues. You don't want to give companies more controll, you need to limit it as much as possible. And thats where piracy comes in to help them realise that there at the customers mercy (or atleast should be).

Piracy is a and copyright infringement is a civil matter between the offender and the copyright holder, and should be the sole responsibility of the holder to persecute. The law's sole purpose is to make sure that whatever happens, is the right thing, not to support the greed of a corpiration.
 
I'm sorry, I can't see how anyone can justify having access to someone else's hard work without paying for the access by some or other means.
 
Strifehart said:
I'm sorry, I can't see how anyone can justify having access to someone else's hard work without paying for the access by some or other means.
Click to expand...

One can barely call it "hard" work in most recent cases. I say it just copy/paste atleast half the time.
 
And once again, Raven Gold does nothing so much as demonstrate his outrageous self-entitlement, greed, and ignorance. Golf clap.
 
Azi, you'll be proud of me...

I visited a mate's house and his housemate had a huge xbox360 collection. Upon closer inspection I noticed they were 80% copied games. So I felt a bit miffed at the oke.

Mine might not be so big (Shoosh Lush, not a word! :mad:) but I'm still proud of it.
 
Wow... as if we don't have more important problems like I don't know... um... rape, murder and hijacking?
Maybe if Publishers opend up more to SA then we would not have so much of a problem
 
Raven Gold said:
well it's all fine and dandy to make piracy a criminal offence. But consider the negative effects of that not only the pirates, who can be ignored with this arguement, but the legitimate customers. Anybody hear about the story of the major bread companies who banded to gether to shoot up all there prices? Well if the game/software companies can get that sort of controll it's going to cause some major issues. You don't want to give companies more controll, you need to limit it as much as possible. And thats where piracy comes in to help them realise that there at the customers mercy (or atleast should be).

Piracy is a and copyright infringement is a civil matter between the offender and the copyright holder, and should be the sole responsibility of the holder to persecute. The law's sole purpose is to make sure that whatever happens, is the right thing, not to support the greed of a corpiration.
Click to expand...

I tried reading that argument in Japanese to see if it made more sense - it didn't. Spell-check FTW Raven.

First of all - how would making piracy a crime affect the legit customers? If I bought the shiny box, before or after the law changes - how does it affect me. It doesn't. However, making it a crime actually makes it easier to prosecute. Instead of the companies now having to go after individuals one at a time, wasting precious time and resource, they can now leave it to the authorities. The state gets to prosecute, and the companies don't have to bear the costs. Nice.

Your argument about the bread cartel - I'm not entirely sure how that fits in. Do people pirate bread? Am I guilty if I bake one of my own? (Not that you'd want to eat anything I bake, but I digress). What control?

Actually, can someone come and clarify that first paragraph for me, because it makes about as much sense as a chocolate toaster.

The law's sole purpose is to make sure that whatever happens, is the right thing, not to support the greed of a corpiration .
Click to expand...

Actually, no. Law's sole purpose is to prevent injustice. Injustice in this case being the fact that some people feel they can just take what they believe they have a right to without paying for it. If I may use an analogy of my own - does Zimbabwe ring any bells? They took the farms, because, from their point of view it belonged to them. Pretty much the same thing you do to games. You know, they're wrong ... you're right. People like you are the reason we're sitting with draconian anti-piracy measures.

This is a very clear picture of right and wrong. Whether it's the job of the copyright holder, or the job of the government to come after your ass is not the question. The greed of corporations don't figure into it. The law has no say in the matter of greed, since greed isn't illegal. The day it becomes illegal - awesome.

I don't see the need to pirate to get my point across. I vote with my wallet - to clarify - I walked into a shop one day and saw two games next to each other. Both new, and at relatively the same cost. And what decided me? Well ... Ubisofts always-on connection requirement doesn't sit well with me - so they lost out on a sale. The other game is sitting on my shelf.

If I pirate it, in a manner of speaking I am still saying to them - great game. Nothing wrong with it. I just have a criminal mind-set so I will steal it.

And I add weight to their argument for stricter controls.

Frankly - I hope the laws do get changed. Deal with it Raven. You support a form of theft. You are taking other people's hard work for yourself without paying for it. Whether you believe you are a modern Robin Hood of sorts has nothing to do with it. Don't split hairs - if the law gets changed, I hope you're one of the first they come after.
 
Voicy said:
Azi, you'll be proud of me...

I visited a mate's house and his housemate had a huge xbox360 collection. Upon closer inspection I noticed they were 80% copied games. So I felt a bit miffed at the oke.

Mine might not be so big (Shoosh Lush, not a word! :mad:) but I'm still proud of it.
Click to expand...

You're so adorable.

shadowfox said:
Actually, can someone come and clarify that first paragraph for me, because it makes about as much sense as a chocolate toaster.
Click to expand...

I loled.
 
Strategist01 said:
Well, the reason we PC fanbois pirate is that we can have money to pimp the PCs, to play the games themselves :D
Click to expand...

What excuse is that? If you cannot afford the hobby then don't do it. Or how about pimping your PC so you can play the game that you legally bought? Instead of using this as the crappiest excuse I've ever heard. Next excuse would be "I am sorry officer, I only stole the petrol cause I got this pimping ride to pay for?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top