Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 00:10 UTC, submitted by SReilly
In the News "Spain last night killed a controversial anti-P2P bill that would have made it easier to shut down websites that link to infringing content. The move was a blow to the ruling Socialist government, but it may be of even bigger concern to the US, which pushed, threatened, and cajoled Spain to clamp down on downloading. And Wikileaks can take a share of the credit for the defeat."
Thread beginning with comment 454581
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Not just anti-P2P
by Damnshock on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 12:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not just anti-P2P"
Damnshock
Member since:
2006-09-15

Walking on the street isn't regulated nor prohibited, and doesn't make it alegal either. Besides, there IS a law that regulates sharing of copyright material, by the way. It's NOT legal UNLESS the material is copied from a legal source, there's no "animo de lucro" (intention of getting rich), and it's for personal use. This is clear as water for the judges, that have been issuing not guilty to every file sharing case here in Spain.


You are wrong. In both things.

Walking on the streets is indeed regulated:

"Artículo 19.

Los españoles tienen derecho a elegir libremente su residencia y a circular por el territorio nacional.

Asimismo, tienen derecho a entrar y salir libremente de España en los términos que la Ley establezca. Este derecho no podrá ser limitado por motivos políticos o ideológicos."

From the Spanish Constitution. I translate for the non spanish speakers:

"The Spanish have the right to chose their residence and to move around the national territory." (the second part is not relevant here)

About that law: You may refer to the LPI (Ley de Propiedad Intelectual) [ http://www.mcu.es/propiedadInt/docs/RDLegislativo_1_1996.pdf].

You should check the article 31:

"2. No necesita autorización del autor la reproducción, en cualquier soporte, de obras ya
divulgadas cuando se lleve a cabo por una persona física para su uso privado a partir de obras
a las que haya accedido legalmente y la copia obtenida no sea objeto de una utilización
colectiva ni lucrativa, sin perjuicio de la compensación equitativa prevista en el artículo 25, que
deberá tener en cuenta si se aplican a tales obras las medidas a las que se refiere el artículo
161. Quedan excluidas de lo dispuesto en este apartado las bases de datos electrónicas y, en
aplicación del artículo 99.a, los programas de ordenador."

I will explain, not translate: this article says that is legal to copy from a legal source for your *own personal usage*. This regulates nothing about you *sharing* your copy. We come again to the "alegal" term ;)

Regards

Regards

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Not just anti-P2P
by Netwalker on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 16:32 in reply to "RE[3]: Not just anti-P2P"
Netwalker Member since:
2010-12-23

Touché on the first part, I forgot about the constitution. Maybe trecking or swiming on a beach whould have been a better example, but I bet there's more of that basic laws in there so I give the point for lost. ;)

But the second part, that piece of the law is the key for what I'm saying. This law's article means...

2. No necesita autorización del autor la reproducción, en cualquier soporte, de obras ya divulgadas


You don't need the author's authorization (for doing a legal copy) in any kind of support, of creations already distributed...

[...] cuando se lleve a cabo por una persona física [...]


...when it's a person who is it doing it (not a company)...

[...] para su uso privado [...]

...for their private use (not to be used on a public proyection, for example a school's proyection...

a partir de obras a las que haya accedido legalmente


...from a legally obtained copy, AND here's the trick: once you make a copy from any content, the copy itself become a legally obtained copy and you can make a copy from it again, that will be legal. Further down there's more conditions:

[...] y la copia obtenida no sea objeto de una utilización colectiva ni lucrativa [...]


...again, no public (collective) use and no money asked for it...

[...] sin perjuicio de la compensación equitativa prevista en el artículo 25, que deberá tener en cuenta si se aplican a tales obras las medidas a las que se refiere el artículo [...]


...that means even if it's a legal copy, you have to pay the "canon". The rest of the article says databases and software is excluded, what means software piracy it's illegal, but music and video is legal the same second the movie is played in a cinema or the song is in a cd for sale.

You should check the Wikipedia article: ( http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derecho_de_copia_privada ). There are references to a judge stating that P2P it's legal ( http://www.elmundo.es/navegante/2006/11/01/tecnologia/1162383709.ht... ) and more information on the issue. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Not just anti-P2P
by Damnshock on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 16:40 in reply to "RE[4]: Not just anti-P2P"
Damnshock Member since:
2006-09-15

"...from a legally obtained copy, AND here's the trick: once you make a copy from any content..."

Here is where we do not agree. To me, the copy where you are copying is an "alegal" copy. Not illegal doesn't make it legal ;)

Regards

Reply Parent Score: 1