Calling Col.CoolJ

[DanE]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

(I expect to be flamed for my opinion but I will post it here any way).

Tom,

Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, so I don't think you have to worry about getting flamed for nicely stating your opinion. I think a major cause for flames is not the opinion itself, but the manner in which the opinion is expressed.

In my opinion is he was owed the software by BTS (having paid for it one way or another) and so where he got it from makes no real difference.

The problem here is that when the game was purchased, it was purchased with the knowledge that the only way you could receive it was via the USPS.

If I purchase a game from Sierra's website, does that mean I can walk into my local computer store and "take" the same game without paying for it? If I return the game to the same store when my order arrives, does that mean that no harm was done?

And since my workday is almost over, I believe this will be the last of my comments on this subject.

------------------

Dan

[Gregory Deych]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If I purchase a game from Sierra's website, does that mean I can walk into my local computer store and "take" the same game without paying for it? If I return the game to the same store when my order arrives, does that mean that no harm was done? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's a pretty weak arguement. You have deprived the store of opportunity to sell their copy of the game, for the period you had it in your posession. I suppose one could argue that CCJ deprived DHL or Fedex of opportunity to deliver him the game next day...but does anybody really want to argue that?

P.S Have you ever loaned something to anybody with expectation of getting it back? A book, a record, a flashlight? Don't you feel bad about depriving the manufacturer of potential sale?

[Philistine]

I agree with those who've said "let this thread die" (Of course, here I am posting to it...).

I think both sides in the issue have very good points, but this seems to be an issue where reasonable minds can differ as to what was "right."

Was CCJ's downloading illegal? Probably (although I'm a little hazy on the actual statute which was violated). Did he feel that his action was completely justified? Probably.

BTS apparently feels that someone who has been involved with downloading warez, in whatever context, may be more likely to slip a copy to pirates (which is a legitimate concern, particularly when you're publishing in a fairly limited "niche" market like wargames). I don't see any problem with that position.

CCJ apparently feels unfairly attacked by those on the board and has at least left the board, and possibly left the MOD "community." This position also seems justified. The amount of venom from (non-BTS) posters towards CCJ has been unwarranted (at least IMHO). BTS has made its position towards CCJ pretty clear, and I'd assume they will not be making beta code of CM2 etc. available to him.

Everyone else's opinions on whether what he did was evil, just stupid, or completely proper is not particularly relevant, and there is a lot of possibility for debate.

For a recent example of just how volatile an issue this is, look at the whole recent Napster injunction. (A case I'll be following with interest--it has fascinating legal issues). Has anyone who is condemning CCJ used Napster?

Oh well, what a long addition to a thread I'm just asking everyone to stop posting to.

--Philistine

[Fionn]

"He was in Australia and found another way of getting the software other than waiting two or three weeks for it to arrive... I really don't see what the big deal is."

I want a 1Gig Athlon. I don't want to have to wait a few months to save up enough to buy it.. I think I'll go rob it now.

Using your logic you'd see nothing wrong with that.

"the game ... could only be purchased via the internet and shipped via snail mail. (A BTS decision that I understand)"

Aye and this was done precisely to stop guys hacking the server and downloading it. Colin, d/led a warez version.

" THEN for the betterment of the game and for the enjoyment of all, he went further with his textures and and posted his latest creations on his web site."

REALLY what all of this comes down to is that SOME people on the forum see nothing wrong with theft so long as they get their "cut" or kickback. It's a sad reflection on your morals.

" For this use of the copy that DID not come in the mail he was labeled by some here a theif and a pirate."

Dude, this isn't an issue of "labelling". Someone who downloads a copy of ANY game off the web IS a pirate AND a thief. This isn't an issue of labelling it's a straight-forward point of law.

"Had the software he was owed been available from and officially blessed BTS server for dwnload NONE of this would have happened."

Of course not BUT that wasn't the case.. You migth as well say "I don't believe Fionn should be prosecuted for stealing a 1 Gig Athlon SINCE if he'd had a 1000 pounds he would have bought it." The simple fact is that if you steal you STEAL and no fancy-assed dancing around the issue changes that.

"I doubt, given the reaction of some here in this forum, that we will hear from ColCoolJ here again."

AND if he hadn't been dishonest enough to STEAL then none of this would have arisen. Next time someone steals a car ask yourself if you're gonna bitch at the thief or the person who castigates him for stealing. Right now you're asking for pity for the thief and bitching because people are saying theft is wrong. Strange ethics.

"I think it is we here who have shot our selves in the foot."

because you won't get his little mod? Are you really willing to be a thief's apologist just to get your hands on his mod? God man, where's your sense of self-worth?

"In my opinion is he was owed the software by BTS (having paid for it one way or another) and so where he got it from makes no real difference."

And my country has laws to protect me from people like you who would let anarchy reign so long as they got their "cut". Really, illegal is illegal is illegal.

And Tom, none of that is a flame.. I am simply disagreeing with you and quite dissapointed at what I perceive as a willingness to condone illegal activities so long as you get something out of them.

And for the record. I use zero pirated or warez stuff and haven't ever used napster.

I DO use a CD ripper to copy files from |CD onto my computer as MP3s because for some reason my damned CD-Rom drive crashes when I try to play audio CDs in it. I do NOT borrow other people's CDs but merely store songs from CDs I've bought on my computer since my hardware won't allow me to play them any other way.

My position as regards piracy has been consistent and strongly held for many years and I don't apologise for stating it publicly.

[Spook]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Colin:

Just though maybe I should clear something up...

I'm not CCJ!!! I used the name Colin on the forum long before he arrived. I had nothing to do with any warez work or anything. Perhaps for the sake of the forum and people who don't know who I am and who he is you should call him CoolColJ or CCJ. Just like to clear things up as I got a couple of angry emails.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In my initial post to "clarify" the setting, it looks instead like I f$#&ed up in using the name "Colin" interchangably in my first post and muddied the waters in your case. My apologies to the Colin here that's wrongly taken flame mails as a result.

And for those sending the flame mails...for God's sake, GET A LIFE!!!! BTS is quite capable of settling the matter with CCJ (and they've already done so) without you having to be sycophant attack dogs on the private e-mail!!

I hope this to be my last post on this topic.

[OsinO]

I agree totally with aka_tom_w.

------------------

¤§ïѤ

[Ricky]

This has been discussed to death before. Time to lock this thread up.

[Fionn]

LOL. Ok just to clear things up.

1. ColCoolJ is Colin CHUNG.

The guy who posts here as Colin is NOT this Colin Chung and is actually quite a nice guy ( once he get bedded in and used to the forum at least ). He'd also better be able to hold the Amis in our RPG game or I'll take him out back and shoot him no matter what Lorak says

Oh and for the record, I amn't in any way advocating flaming Colin Chung either.. Just don't use his mods.. I know that I won't play anyone who uses his mods andf that's my way of showing disapproval. If you want to show dissaproval do the same but I don't see any need to get personal and private with this.

[aka_tom_w]

Fionn and I disagree very strongly on this issue.

I can live with that.

My point is that you cannot steal something you have already paid for.

Fionn feels strongly it was theft to download a previously (Day-0, I understand) ripped copy of CM.

I respect his position, but

we could not be in stronger disagreement.

oh well..

-tom w

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 08-02-2000).]

[crumply]

If anybody cares, and I certainly would not blame them if they don't, I ocassionally practice intellectual property law, and Fionn, as a matter of law, you are, in my non expert opinion, wrong when you say downloading a copy of code you have the right to use is theft.

The fact that the warez code is not identical (it's had the copy protection ripped) to the original code is not an issue: 1. the user does not "use" copy protection, and 2. it's ridiculous to suggest that the license requires you to use all of the code.

The analogy to the stolen chip is bogus. There you are stealing physical property that you have no right to possess. The proper analogy is: you pay for the chip, and then the store refuses to give it you. if they leave it laying on the counter and you pick it up, you haven't stolen anything. Or, in IP terms, you purchase a music CD. You hear the same copyrighted material being played at a friends house. You still haven't committed theft.

If the guy lied about downloading a hacked version, then it's a lie. But don't call the guy a thief when he isn't.

BTW, in most states doing so is defamatory per se.

[Guest Pillar]

Crumply,

If you're a lawyer, you're the worst one I've ever met.

Do you know what a "Contract" is? BTS has an agreement with the consumer to ship the product. It's all made up front. The billing is done only when the product is shipped. This *CONTRACT* is made clearly to the consumer before the purchase is made.

I don't mind people debating whether there is a moral issue here or not, but for you to come on here and say that legally Fionn is wrong is way out of line.

To say that BTS is somehow hurting it's customer and comparing them to a bullying organization that takes your money and doesn't give you your product is ludicrous.

I highly recommend you get back to your books.

I think you may enjoy reading this article:

http://capitalismmagazine.com/2000/june/piracy_is_theft.htm

[This message has been edited by Pillar (edited 08-02-2000).]

[Jarmo]

How sad to see this same dabate again.

My wiev to this is:

1. Did Cool hurt BTS or somenone else with his actions?

There is a microscopic chance, that had he not downloaded, the

warez site would have removed CM from their list due to lack

of demand.

As for this being equal to stealing. Try reporting it to

the police. They'll laugh you out. Try reporting someone

stealing stereos. Different, very different.

2. Did those driving Cool out hurt BTS or someone else?

Yes. No more textures. Good graphics are important to some.

Many sales might be lost, someone seeing CM run with ColJ textures

might go ahead and buy it.

------------------

Now, would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of

our trenches and walking slowly towards the enemy sir?

[crumply]

Pillar--You're brain has apparently been devoured by insects--seek medical attention. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. And of course piracy is theft, and no I was not comparing BTS to a store that took your money and would not deliver the product.

And god forbid I tell someone that they are wrong. Let me just suggest if you call someone a thief and you are wrong (and downloading code that you have a right to use is not theft) you can get sued, and you can lose.

[This message has been edited by crumply (edited 08-02-2000).]

[Philistine]

Crumbly and Pillar, just a note on the legality (I don't practice IP law, the last real experience I've had was a couple of classes ten years ago, so take this for what it's worth):

I'm not sure downloading warez is technically "theft", although it depends on the laws in the particular jurisdiction--and which jurisdiction's laws apply get's real hazy--is it the downloader's, the pirate's or the actual manufacturer's?

Pretty clearly though, it's a copyright violation. The hacked .exe makes the software a derivative work, making it a clear copyright violation.

To me, I equate it with ordering a compact disk from mail order. Before you receive it, you record it from a friend (or download it from napster or the equivalent--which is probably more relavent). Pretty clearly a copyright violation (regardless of your "right" to own a copy, you are either commiting, and/or receiving a copy from, infringers). Of course, I'm too lazy to look this up now, but if anyone is really interested, I will.

Analogies with physical property don't work real well with intellectual property (not that that'll stop me from making one, of course)--but I think a closer one than taking something you've bought from a store is where you buy a video (or CD) by mail. Before it is shipped, you shoplift the identical video or CD, copy it and return it.

The question of whether downloading warez is improper does not seem to be up to much debate from a legal standpoint. The "moral" issue (meaning whether it's seen by the majority of people as more akin to speeding then shoplifting) is still, IMHO in something of a flux and seems to be situation dependent. I'd expect public attitudes about it to gel in the next several years, one way or the other, as more people get more familiar with the technology, and technology is able to either curtail pirates for the most part or prove unable to contain them completely.

--Philistine

[aka_tom_w]

Well this is interesting

If I understand the above posts correctly

it appears that even two lawyers here are disagreeing on this issue as to whether there was IP theft in this instance.

Is that the case here?

-tom w

[Fangorn]

I've promissed to myself to stay out of this topic, but, as a lawyer, I can't stand quiet to such arguments.

Pillar,

Sorry, but you're wrong. The fact that CCJ and BTS have a contract is not an issue here. What up for questioning is if CCJ have commited a crime for taking a warez version of the object of the contract (if he did that, which wasn't proved, altough the evidences are heavy against him).

I'm quite sure the contract doesn't have a rule that says CCJ couldn't download a copy of the game, and even if it has one, CCJ would be guilty of breaching the contract, not for theft.

Now, the question about if that's crime is far more complicated, and it depends on the law system. Unless an Oz lawyer or someone who knows the Oz law system can give us the answer, I don't think we should call him to be a thief. What people doesn't understand well is that what's a crime under the US law system may not be under British law and so on. And calling someone to be a thief when he can not be one is a crime all by itself (at least under some law systems).

I still refuse to argue about the moral side of the question, the only one that real open to arguments (imho), for that would be useless. I really doubt someone will change its point of view on the subject.

[Philistine]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

If I understand the above posts correctly

it appears that even two lawyers here are disagreeing on this issue as to whether there was IP theft in this instance.

Is that the case here?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, Kind of... Although I think it's more a semantics question.

I'm no expert in any way shape or form on IP law, and I haven't looked at the statutes recently (and I know there has been a fair amount of legislation in the past serveral years in various areas relating to online actions) so I'm really arguing more from a theoretical standpoint, then a practical. With that caveat:

IP law is fairly complex, and a violation isn't "theft" under most technical definitions of theft is statutes. Generally, (in U.S. law), theft is a state crime while IP violation is a federal crime (this is not strictly true, but is close enough as a general maxim).

Now it may be that downloading unauthorized or pirated programs has been made a crime in its own right in some states or countries--I'm not sure of this. However, Fanghorn definitely has it right in that deciding both if and whose crime has been committed is a quagmire. Consider an Australian downloading a copy of CM (made by a U.S. company) from a server in Russia which had been uploaded by a person in Denmark. Whose laws are violated? The legal community (at least in the U.S. has not yet come up with a satisfactory mechanism for determining the place of online transactions [for purposes of determining which state's/countries laws apply and whether a person can be tried by the courts of a particular state or not]).

Anything I say is based soley on U.S. laws (and is most likely wrong in any event )

--Philistine

[Fangorn]

Philistine,

Due the fact we are talking about a crime and not a contract, I believe that Astralia law is the competent one (locus regit actum). Nevertheless, I can be wrong about that. Again, it all depends on what Oz legal system says about the question.

[Philistine]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fangorn:

Due the fact we are talking about a crime and not a contract, I believe that Astralia law is the competent one (locus regit actum). Nevertheless, I can be wrong about that. Again, it all depends on what Oz legal system says about the question. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, he would definitely be subject to Australian law (depending on whether it crimilinlized the conduct), but most state criminal laws have a long arm provision that allows them to reach extraterritorialy (assuming you can get jurisdiction) where the act had an effect in the state (don't know if federal laws have something similar, but I would assume so). The old law school example of a gunman just over the border in one state shoots a person just over the border in another. It's a crime in both states.

Similarly, I would think that a person in Australia who used a computer to transfer money from a U.S. bank would be subject to U.S. criminal law (as well as Australian)

Now extraditing anyone for downloading warez....

--Philistine

(Mind you, my criminal law knowledge is even sketchier than my IP knowledge)

[OsinO]

Once again, I agree with Jarmo

------------------

¤§ïѤ

[Maximus]

OK, I'm a little "iffy" on this whole thing.

Now how many of you have ever made a pirated copy of

1) A music cassette or CD.

2) A video tape.

3) Taped a show/movie off of TV.

4) Recorded songs off of the radio.

5) Downloaded free MP3s off of sites like Napster

Hell, I even know someone that gets boot-leg copies of first run movies while they are still at the theaters using home video cameras.

The point is that ALL of this media is copyrighted. The law is is that you can do this, you just can't SELL pirated copies for your own profit.

So downloading a warez copy of a program is not a whole lot different, now is it. Now if CCJ, sold a copy of it, then that's a different story.

------------------

Be sure and check out my texture mods on CMHQ.

Dave "Ol' Blood & Maximus Butticus" Molinarolo

[Philistine]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maximus:

The point is that ALL of this media is copyrighted. The law is is that you can do this, you just can't SELL pirated copies for your own profit.

So downloading a warez copy of a program is not a whole lot different, now is it. Now if CCJ, sold a copy of it, then that's a different story.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actaully, it's not just sales of pirated copies that is illegal, it is acutally making them or getting them. (Not sure about T.V. shows & radio--I think (but I'm not sure) that that is the case of those that are actually broadcast--i.e. can tape but not sell. Everything else is definitely illegal.

Selling it just makes it (much) more illegal & jumps up the gravity of the offense. (Again this is U.S. law, but I'm pretty sure most other countries are similar).

--Philistine

[Fangorn]

Philistine,

Well, let's just say that this case is even more hairer than those I've seen in college

The big problem is, what CCJ has one (if he did it) may not be a crime in Oz, which means that, even if that's a crime under US state or federal law, he can't be sued. Anyway, I really doubt that he could be extraditaded as he's an Australian citizen. Imagine an case that's what is a crime under a state law and not in another, as the gunman example. If that's not a crime to that state, can he be sued in the other one?

[Maximus]

So Fionn...I bet you never taped anything off of TV. You broke copyright laws.....you THIEF!!!

I bet you never taped one of your so precious football (soccer) games off of TV to watch it later. "This game is copyrighted and can only be reproduced or re-broadcast via expressed written consent of the National Football League (or whatever)" Now how many of you have ever written a letter to the NFL asking if you could tape a game??? Answer: NEVER!

So let's get off of this stupid subject.

------------------

Be sure and check out my texture mods on CMHQ.

Dave "Ol' Blood & Maximus Butticus" Molinarolo

[OsinO]

Yah