1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Court Rules Computer Code Is Not "Property" and Can't be Stolen!

Discussion in 'General Software' started by newtekie1, Apr 13, 2012.

  1. Kreij

    Kreij Senior Monkey Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    13,881 (4.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,619
    Location:
    Cheeseland (Wisconsin, USA)
    Unfortunately the US court systems and patent offices were wholly unprepared for the onslaught of digital litigation as the laws in existance were not sufficient to cover this type of media.

    Until they get something in place that covers all of the things that would be considered nebulous in the current laws, I feel that the poor dead horse is going to be pummeled into oblivion in discussions such as these.
     
    Chevalr1c, H82LUZ73 and 95Viper say thanks.
  2. trickson

    trickson OH, I have such a headache

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,494 (1.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    Location:
    Planet Earth.
    Horse hamburger with pink slime! MMMMMMM so good!
     
  3. Vulpesveritas

    Vulpesveritas

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    383 (0.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    85
    Location:
    USA
    You know it is funny that in the United States of America's you're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. Sad things don't seem to work that way anymor and that companies value profits over ethics and aiding humanity as a whole.
    And while I know a business is a business, it is still run by men, although the illusion of power corrupts, and I can't say with any level of certainty that had I grown up as they had, and achieved such as level of financial success that I would act differently.
    Which is one of the main issues with the copyright and patent system, while it does cause people to make new things and pay those who create, it has become such a system that rewards greed and reduces quality, pushing for profits instead of simply for the sake of others, innovation, and creativity.
     
  4. entropy13

    entropy13

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,972 (2.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,219

    :wtf:

    Show me the amendment where Steevo or anyone has no "right" to post anything on a privately owned website.

    So you're insisting that that's what it actually means..?

    Well you still have the right to plant the tree in someone's yard, so I don't see how it connects to the youtube issue. :laugh:

    If it's a fruit-bearing plant though, laws typically gives the owner of the land the right to the fruits. Sometimes though there are laws that specify a 50/50 sharing, especially if the one that planted it is the one that maintains the tree, but doesn't own the land.


    Anyway, I guess the crux of the code issue is that unlike other things that uses a language, like literature, programming is "too standardized" so to speak, and then of course (and more importantly) there's also the issue about the form the computer code exists in.
     
  5. Kreij

    Kreij Senior Monkey Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    13,881 (4.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,619
    Location:
    Cheeseland (Wisconsin, USA)
    The analogies are awful lol

    No, you do not have the right to plant a tree in my yard. You don't even have the right to enter my yard if I post a "no tresspassing" sign and I have the right to confront you at gunpoint if I feel the situation requires it (percieved threat). If you get physical becuase you are mad I won't let you plant a tree I have the right to shoot you (WI's castle doctrine law).

    That being said, if you want to come plant trees in my yard it's okay with me. I'll even supply the beer. :)
     
  6. Steevo

    Steevo

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    8,545 (2.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,314
    If we were to liken this to planting a tree, it would be like us being invited to plant trees in a privately owned area, by the owner. We could plant any type of tree we wanted. However there are certain trees that are fully and wholly owned by numerous companies, and while we can use parts of the tree, we cannot use or plant the whole tree.


    This company new is following us around and removing our trees, uninvited by the landowner, as they bear too much semblance to their trees, and it is up to us to prove they do not.
     
    10 Million points folded for TPU
  7. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    21,295 (7.72/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,780
    You have a right to do whatever you want with YOUR OWN PROPERTY. Youtube is not your property. Youtube is responsible for whatever video you upload that might violate copyright once they are informed it is in violation. If the owner of a song came along and said "Steevo is using our music illegally" then Youtube has to take it down. You never had a "right" to put it there to begin with and Youtube has every right to take it down to keep from getting sued. Would you rather Youtube keep it up and in case you were wrong take the full blame for illegally distributing copyrighted material? That doesn't make any sense man. You would do the EXACT SAME THING if you were in Youtubes shoes.

    Now you may have had a legitimate use for the music but Youtube has an obligation to protect itself in case you didn't. So yes. You have no rights when it comes to someone else's privet property.

    On a side note I'm impressed with you Steevo! You have managed to keep the discussion civil! lol :toast: Normally you lose your temper. Kudos!
     
  8. trickson

    trickson OH, I have such a headache

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,494 (1.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    Location:
    Planet Earth.
    Well this is not trees, This is about code. Code is not intellectual property, It i written and can not be stolen. I think they got blind sided. If they would have said plagiarized then it might have been held up as intellectual property. But they went down a different path with it and this is what the court ruled on. Code is Code. every thing I just typed is coded. And there for can not be viewed as stolen or copyrighted material.
     
  9. Kreij

    Kreij Senior Monkey Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    13,881 (4.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,619
    Location:
    Cheeseland (Wisconsin, USA)
    If someone is removing YT videos (and it's not YT) then one would have to assume they were invited (given the ability) by YT to do so, no?
     
  10. trickson

    trickson OH, I have such a headache

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,494 (1.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    Location:
    Planet Earth.
    There is a way around this. Build your own fence on your own property and plant your trees there. Or in this case your own video upload site. See that would fix your problem.
     
  11. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,228 (6.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,269
    In a private website you have no rights, period. The word you are looking for is privilege, you have the privilege of posting on their website. Just like you have the privilege of posting here on TPU. At any time, your privileges can be revoked and you can be stopped from posting completely. This applies here, youtube, or any other website that you don't personally own. If you don't think that is true, ask any one of the poeple that have been banned from posting on this site. A right can't be taken away in this manner, it is always there. People need to learn the difference between a right and privilege.

    What you do have is the right to create your own site and post all the content you want to it. That is your right, it is not a right to post freely on other's websites. You also have the right to control content of your own website however you see fit. If you don't like comments or content posted to it, you have the right to delete it, just like the owners of youtube and TPU have the right to delete anything posted to their sites. You do not have to first prove the content is illegal, you don't have to ask the content owner's permission. It is your right to delete content from your website for whatever reason you feel.

    So if you want to complain about rights, learn what your rights actually are, learn the different between a privlege and a right and where each one applies, then create your own site where you actually do have rights.

    Actually, no you don't. I can kick you off my property before or even after you plant the tree, and your tree is gone. I can prevent your from even coming on my property at any time. And after I tell you to stay off my property, if you come back, I can have you arrested, in some places I can even shoot your ass if you step foot on my property after being told not to. And legally, if you do plant a tree on someone elses property, the tree becomes the property of the property owner. There are some loopholes where if the property isn't being maintained and you start maintaining it you do have certain rights to claim partial ownership of the property, or if you didn't know it wasn't your property and the real owner didn't stop you right away you can have some rights to the tree. However, those don't really apply here, youtube is maintaining their site, and you know that they own the site.

    Just like you and the other mods here delete posts here on TPU even though you don't own the site. 3rd parties can be given the right to manage content. You are given permission to manage content for W1z on behalf of W1z.
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2012
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  12. Kreij

    Kreij Senior Monkey Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    13,881 (4.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,619
    Location:
    Cheeseland (Wisconsin, USA)
    Code is definitely intellectial property (it is ethereal (a product of imagination) but can be expressed on a medium), it's just that copying it does not fit the traditional definition of stolen (removed from possession of original owner) which is what the court ruled on.

    So is anyone coming over to plant trees? I have a bobcat we can use. :cool:
     
  13. trickson

    trickson OH, I have such a headache

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,494 (1.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    Location:
    Planet Earth.
    Well not all code is intellectual property. Like for instance every time I hit the key to make the letters I am typing are not intellectual property. Every letter has a "code" for that key ( Right?) so how can a letter be held as intellectual property? And how can it be perceived as stolen? But yes CODE a written program is intellectual property protected under copyright laws. So the court ruled that the transfer from one medium to another is not stolen! So one could take a program written on a floppy disk and transfer it to a CD and it is not stolen.
     
  14. Steevo

    Steevo

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    8,545 (2.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,314
    I need to make a trip to the nursery on piccadilly, I killed our smoke tree, by accident of course, and am going to replace it with a peach, or pear tree. If have to water and prune them I might as well get benefit from them.

    Going tomorrow.


    I use one of our Case skid steers from work, get to use it when I need it. And sometimes at work when I don't want to.
     
    10 Million points folded for TPU
  15. entropy13

    entropy13

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,972 (2.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,219
    Anyone has the right to plant a tree in your yard. It just so happens you can also enforce your own rights as property owner and disallow people from doing so, but that doesn't mean that preventing people from planting a tree in your yard automatically means they do not have the "right." In the case you presented, what happens is that your right to stop people from entering your property is in a "superior" position over someone planting a tree on your yard. But once again, that doesn't automatically mean that someone has NO right simply because you have the right to prevent that someone from planting a tree on your yard.


    Which doesn't automatically mean someone doesn't have the right to plant a tree in your yard.

    Which doesn't automatically mean someone doesn't have the right to plant a tree in your yard.

    Which doesn't automatically mean someone doesn't have the right to plant a tree in your yard. You are not depriving someone of his right to plant a tree on your yard. Rather you are enforcing your own right over your own property instead. You are preventing someone from using his right, but you are not depriving him of that right, and following that logical reasoning even further, that doesn't mean that someone suddenly has no right to do so. Preventing something from happening doesn't mean that something would no longer exist.


    They own the site but youtube does not exclusively maintain their site.
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2012
  16. Kreij

    Kreij Senior Monkey Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    13,881 (4.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,619
    Location:
    Cheeseland (Wisconsin, USA)
    Lol ... I agree trickson. What I actually meant when I said "code" was ..
    "A collection of bits varying in value between one and zero which when combined in a specific manner perform a particular function or display a particular visual representation upon a medium which is comaptible with the order and combinations of said bits."

    Now don't "steal" my above line of codes. :laugh:
     
    Chevalr1c, trickson and stinger608 say thanks.
  17. trickson

    trickson OH, I have such a headache

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,494 (1.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    Location:
    Planet Earth.
    1110000111010111100000110101111001010001110011001100000001111111 :roll:
     
  18. radusorin

    radusorin

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    67 (0.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    8
    Location:
    Romania
    >out of popcorn<

    I think you mean the right to plant a tree period. But not the right to do something with my property.

    After all if that is my property doing something on it or whit it, he needs to have my approval. After all that is the difference between my yard and no one yard or a public yard ... (even public yard was it own set of rules to be use but that is not the point here).
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2012
  19. Kreij

    Kreij Senior Monkey Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    13,881 (4.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,619
    Location:
    Cheeseland (Wisconsin, USA)
    You should get another smoke tree too. When ours died for some unknown reason I planted another. They are quite the beautiful tree and I would like to plant a row of them on our property somewhere. When viewed from a distance at the right time of year, they indeed give you the impression they are surrounded by smoke.

    This is just arguing semantics. Of course there are superceeding laws as it would impossible (and absurd to attempt) to write laws for any action someone could imagine.
    When you come over to plant a tree in my yard you must perform two actions.
    1) Enter my yard.
    2) Plant a tree.
    By the fact your first action violates a law you have no right to perform the second action.
    Most parks are considered municipally owned, public property, but you have no right to dig a hole and plant a tree there either, even though your taxes are used to maintain it.

    But hey, I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV. So this is just interesting discussion here on my fave forum. :toast:
     
  20. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,228 (6.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,269

    Look up what a right is, because I don't think it means what you think it means. If planting a tree on someone else property was a right, you could do it even if the property owner didn't want you to. Planting a tree on your own property is a right, because no one can stop you, planting a tree on my property is not a right because someone(me) can stop you.


    And exactly how will they be planting a tree on my property if they can't get on it? Explain that to me?

    So I have effectively stopped them from planting a tree on my yard, so it isn't a right.

    So they will be using magic then to get on my property to plant this tree?

    You point? They ensure the site is maintained. I own a large plot of land, I don't go out and mow it myself every week, I have a service that does that for me that doesn't mean I forfeit my rights over the property.
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2012
    trickson and Kreij say thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  21. Benetanegia

    Benetanegia New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    2,683 (1.39/day)
    Thanks Received:
    694
    Location:
    Reaching your left retina.
    So can I download a tree or not?
     
  22. trickson

    trickson OH, I have such a headache

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,494 (1.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    Location:
    Planet Earth.
    Yes just do not plant it on my network. :twitch:
     
  23. entropy13

    entropy13

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,972 (2.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,219
    Why don't YOU look up what a right is? Are you seriously suggesting that you can only have a right if "no one can stop you"? I have the right to life, but someone can actually stop me from living, for very obvious reasons, and because someone "can stop" me in exercising that right, my right to life is actually not a right at all?

    Having a right doesn't necessarily mean you can always exercise it, as I have already stated in my earlier posts. Your prevention of the exercise of that right is merely through your own exercise of your own rights, and not because you "removed" the right to plant a tree, or the right does not exist.

    So I have effectively stopped some person from living, therefore living isn't a right.

    And technically speaking, you can say that you have "deprived" someone of his specific right, but you cannot say he never had that specific right to do so in the first place, or that it isn't a right to begin with.

    Although "depriving" someone of his right is also typically through illegal or unlawful practices (as killing someone is typically that; unless during a war, and both are combatants, for example)... That's why instead of using that term, in your case, you just enforced your own right, which leads to the inability of the other person's enforcement of his right.

    Which is YOUR case. Considering that Universal can delete videos even though there is no infringing content makes Youtube actually different to the situation you presented. And we should really stop with this very bad analogy that TMM made up. Real Property Laws are quite well-defined, and to be honest can be considered in existence ever since civilization began. Unlike Intellectual Property which are just recent developments, and quite obviously unable to match technological progress.
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2012
  24. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,228 (6.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,269
    The difference is that if I kill you, stopping your right to live, I'd be violating your right, and I would be in the wrong(that is why I'd go to jail). If I stop you from planting a tree on my property I would not be violating your right, and I wouldn't be in the wrong(that is why I wouldn't go to jail). See the difference?

    If stopping the action is wrong, the action is a right.
    If stopping the action isn't wrong, the action isn't a right.
    It isn't really that hard of a concept to understand.

    Actually, yes, by definition a right is something that can always be exercised. Again, I urge you to look it up. However, rights can be violated as I explained above, they can also be forfeited(for example, criminals that have been found guilty forfeit certain rights).

    No, therefor you have violated the persons right. I'm not violating your rights by preventing you from planting a tree on my property, because planting a tree on my property isn't a right.

    Actually, yes you can say that something isn't a right to begin with. To begin with, nothing is a right that violates the rights of someone else. That is a basic concept of rights. That is why generally shooting someone in the face is wrong, because you are violating someone else's right. If planting a tree on my property was a right, me stopping you would be illegal.

    Sort of. A better example would be print or broadcast media. Generally, freedom of speech is a right. However, newspapers and TV channels don't have to let every whackjob that wants to say something do so in their mediums. Someone can't walk into the Time's building and demand the Time's print their crazy false story. However, nothing stops that person from making their own newspaper and printing their story in their own paper.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  25. HammerON

    HammerON The Watchful Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    6,566 (3.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,677
    Now this has been a funny thread to read:slap:
     
    Steevo and 95Viper say thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page