Question about Torrent files

Status
Not open for further replies.

KingAustin

Daemon Poster
Messages
673
Location
Iowa
First of all, just want to point out that this has nothing to do with asking anything about finding torrents or anything related to sites, just so this thread doesn't get locked.

I'm in college and am on the college's networks, as well as everyone is within the dorms. If someone gets caught torrenting, they are sent a warning first, then a 2nd warning results in a few week ban. One of my friends was caught at the beginning of the year downloading a copy of a game for the game cube (not sure why), and it happened to be a tracked torrent, so he got a letter, just said he deleted it and all was ok. However, now the interesting part. He never finished downloading the file, as it was stuck at 99.0%. As far as I know, this makes it not illegal to have possession of because it's an incomplete file, meaning it's just a bunch of useless bits.

So my question is, does anyone know the actual legal stance on this? I'm really hoping the law would favor the accused since it's not copyright material, just a bunch of bits which can't work together. Feel free to throw in your opinion as well.
 
Hello,

It may be incomplete, but I'm sure that the 99% of data is still illegal (since it's been illegally obtained) because your friend had 99% of the code for that game, and that data is always the same despite whether the ROM had completed downloading or not.

For example, if a user were to download a copyrighted song, illegally over a bittorrent network, and only 50% of the song was successfully downloaded onto the PC, that user still has 50% of data representing that song whether it be playable of not.

This is my understanding anyway.
 
Hello,

It may be incomplete, but I'm sure that the 99% of data is still illegal (since it's been illegally obtained) because your friend had 99% of the code for that game, and that data is always the same despite whether the ROM had completed downloading or not.

For example, if a user were to download a copyrighted song, illegally over a bittorrent network, and only 50% of the song was successfully downloaded onto the PC, that user still has 50% of data representing that song whether it be playable of not.

This is my understanding anyway.


It's the fact that it's unplayable that makes up my argument. A file that's 99% downloaded is not a complete file, therefore it can't be copyrighted because you can't copyright random bits of files. It's like the movie Minority Report. If you were to get in trouble before you did anything, that's complete BS and definitely won't work in our court system. As I see it, you're not in possession of anything illegal if it's random bits of code that have no continuity to create a working file of the copyrighted material.
 
It could go either way... under the PRESUMPTION that it is copy-righted, then it is ILLEGAL... But on the flip side, just because a file has a particular name, doesn't mean it is what it seems. It could be something else, just with that name...

That is just for discussion's sake. In court, I DOUBT that would hold up. Who knows though... no point in arguing about it... delete it and move on... purchase games.
 
Would that be like being a little bit pregnant?

99% or 1%, it wouldn't matter in a court of law. It is enough to show intent, if not possession.
 
It could go either way... under the PRESUMPTION that it is copy-righted, then it is ILLEGAL... But on the flip side, just because a file has a particular name, doesn't mean it is what it seems. It could be something else, just with that name...

That is just for discussion's sake. In court, I DOUBT that would hold up. Who knows though... no point in arguing about it... delete it and move on... purchase games.

Well I just remembered this, what about the Fair Use law? Within the law it suggests it's ok if just a small portion of copyrighted work was used. This can roughly be applied to this situation to cover for, let's say 20% of the file. So possibly in that situation you're perfectly within the boundaries of the law. You might even be able to stretch that and suggest that since you never received a full, working copy of the offending material, you had not been allowed the chance to commit a crime, regardless if it's obvious that was the plan. Conspiracy to commit copyright infringement isn't a crime as far as I know, so it seems as if you could get away with it. Anyone disagree with using Fair Use for this?
 
you were attempting to dl a copyrighted game as soon as you hit the dl button you're busted weather you get .1% or 100%, you had the intent of violating copyright laws, same thign as attempting murder if you only half killed someoe you're stil busted for attempted murder, you should read up on the mpaa they dont give a F***. so i say nintendo wins. and it isnt random bits of code since you are downloading the actual iso/files so you have some of the program, it has been illegal for backup purposes also so either way you're screwed
 
you were attempting to dl a copyrighted game as soon as you hit the dl button you're busted weather you get .1% or 100%, you had the intent of violating copyright laws, same thign as attempting murder if you only half killed someoe you're stil busted for attempted murder, you should read up on the mpaa they dont give a F***. so i say nintendo wins. and it isnt random bits of code since you are downloading the actual iso/files so you have some of the program, it has been illegal for backup purposes also so either way you're screwed

As I said before, conspiracy to commit copyright infringement is not a crime. The .iso is put in to hashes in a .torrent format, you don't have the actual iso until it's done. You can't compare murder and downloading either. I'm asking if anyone actually knows something about the law here, and so far with my Fair Use law argument, I believe I'm right.
 
No matter how you argue it, you cannot justify it. Either take responsibility for your actions, or shut up about it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom