Board logo

標題: 大家認為古惑天皇既下場?[積極回應者+5] [打印本頁]
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-29 09:52 PM     標題: 大家認為古惑天皇既下場?[積極回應者+5]

我希望佢冇事!7 F& T1 A  n& ^0 T( G% m  i4 S/ e
佢都係方便各網友啫!
* i/ }  N/ m- L) y; o之前我都有好多套戲響佢度download.
. V% w6 \0 c! H2 E) y3 i6 H告得入就俾班仆街開到先例!/ g0 F7 s2 [6 m5 r
我覺得bt係一個灰色地帶, 唔可能好definite話係侵權或犯法!
# Q! y/ o0 k- y  F7 B% D* q/ k- Q. N班友甘大回嚮甘狼都係感情因素居多!& _( Q9 h& X0 D( A9 Q
純個人意見! 冇意開戰!亦不打算回應!
( Z% q" s" h+ M( R+ ^7 N" M! ~- ~3 G0 p, f; X
[ Last edited by 樂壇渣Fit人 on 2005-4-30 at 11:32 AM ]
作者: tony    時間: 2005-4-29 09:58 PM

冇事!
作者: Ricky00893    時間: 2005-4-29 10:02 PM

罰款 $ 5000
作者: dogson009    時間: 2005-4-29 10:03 PM

其實我都唔肯定係咪真有其人=.=
作者: goonejp    時間: 2005-4-29 10:47 PM

法律已死,班友强姦法律
9 U  s  f2 O/ Q* t, e. whttp://jm.g.free.fr/smileys/Xsmileys/iconsex----dog.gif
7 _. N- {8 J/ o! z+ p* B( [* ]8 A6 R+ O+ m2 S
[ Last edited by goonejp on 2005-4-29 at 10:48 PM ]
作者: chickenboy    時間: 2005-4-29 11:03 PM

kill chicken scare monkey.....佢起碼都要守行為
作者: 692004    時間: 2005-4-29 11:09 PM

冇罪釋放
作者: bob64    時間: 2005-4-29 11:10 PM

打靶!!
作者: king_king    時間: 2005-4-29 11:14 PM

小弟覺得會冇事,但會好似m$,要公開道歉.
作者: abc123aa    時間: 2005-4-29 11:15 PM

最好就冇事,否則班所謂的"電影人"就有本地案例
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-29 11:16 PM

我覺得班友成日嘈話侵版權, 但我覺得佢哋自己做就冇問題!
4 @  [6 a" t/ y( @根本bt係灰色地域!我覺得即係未係犯法!甘邊有理由入佢罪?
0 a( l6 Q* w; e% A% d" u"老鼠愛大米"甘, 人人爭黎唱, 講真, 佢哋甘正義, 自動自覺交返版權費俾個原創者囉! 咪又係食個灰色地帶話國語版冇版權邊個鍾意就攞黎唱!2 H8 X2 p  v# @' a
講開又講!首歌根本唔好聽(我唔識欣賞啦!)啲詞直接係好, 但太老土了!啲人而家老土當冧歌!$ f2 z9 a9 t- y
香港人有啲真係好似中咗毒甘!!!
作者: EV4886    時間: 2005-4-29 11:18 PM

美國咁講版權法都吾敢告BT,香港海關想扮勁想做世界法治一哥,輸.....輸硬.(除非又請人大釋法)
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-29 11:26 PM

重有就係, 佢而家唔係只係針對"公開"既人, 連攞黎睇既人都想造佢哋!
' m$ g$ k. `5 Q- Y根本就荒天下之大謬!
# U8 e4 `: _9 z& m5 `8 t/ i不知所謂!
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-29 11:27 PM

重有就係, 佢而家唔係只係針對"公開"既人, 連攞黎睇既人都想造佢哋!
( j! A: b' b, R" F8 w( H2 O" _2 S1 [; `根本就荒天下之大謬!$ g% ~6 P2 w! \9 f& a7 O
不知所謂!
作者: nkt1000    時間: 2005-4-29 11:36 PM

希望古惑天皇兄會冇事吧!!!
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-29 11:47 PM

我希望佢冇事之餘,仲可以挫一挫班契弟既銳氣!
作者: 短毛    時間: 2005-4-29 11:48 PM

大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好似*講明*非牟利性*的侵犯版權也算是犯法.' w1 T  h4 S+ M. T
/ J* c8 B1 I& h0 _3 R: j' C+ D  p
佢放種子俾人下載, 明顯地有動機讓其他人下載.
+ [% J: |0 J% I. r! |+ \" e1 ?  y" p2 c/ g# l0 Y
現在好似有人做錯事(非法盜版)但好多人都覺得沒有大不了.5 }! L9 m4 Q) l+ C# l# j
4 ]  f' }1 w* ^9 N* e) f
沒有意思偏幫那一方, 只希望大家可以討論一下.3 M2 ?2 p* d2 C

" X9 p7 S3 N! @6 n9 P/ C& d9 d還有報紙中提到一百萬人下載某一部戲, 損失幾億元, 那個記者一定沒有讀經濟的, 沒有成本下需求當然大. 叫人$60買張飛都無咁多人睇啦~
作者: lijinwei    時間: 2005-4-29 11:51 PM

想罰錢, 但因他失業, 身家不多6 D8 V: Z  h9 K7 b" z# q& k, H' c
要坐牢, 但政府財赤, 還要出錢養一個失業的人0 e2 d& X- U9 Y" y2 ^
罰少少錢, 守行為並留案底算了吧
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-29 11:58 PM

Originally posted by 短毛 at 2005-4-29 11:48 PM:
, s1 Y. }, p  Q" j大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
/ N4 W$ k. L4 u. e3 r; avcd鋪通常一有新返既碟就對住大街大行黎播! $ l. n" W8 g  X, P) Y0 i) p
然後啲人睇睇下入去買咗!
: e& |& |. |# S" n既牟利又侵權!
3 U- E0 j6 I, V  D% S但亦大行其道.....
0 N- A) f/ Z; a" Y$ {2 y* _唉! 唔係話甘就唔代表bt係唔犯法定係點......
# Y. \* f- u( N, K/ j8 b/ e. q只係香港政府係多重標準!
: T9 Y7 k: C; c9 X: X  `0 _! ^同埋bt冇先例, 始終係灰色地帶!
7 P) b( x/ |) E" v" x& l' X難聽到嘔既老鼠愛大米國語版俾啲人大搖大擺攞黎唱到臭晒又冇事...../ ?; ]' j4 }9 E$ h0 v6 F1 ^
所以話, 香港政府都係仆街黎! 鍾意點就點!正仆街!
作者: EV4886    時間: 2005-4-30 12:08 AM

無得告 la~~~全世界都冇先例又冇法証參考,香港e班2打6法官點識判,陳嘉上點都惡吾過哥倫比亞或Dream Work掛,e家個個都想睇香港點死.
作者: 史艷文2    時間: 2005-4-30 01:00 AM

雖然我唔用BT,因我中意租碟用電視睇(畫面大)
* o5 o4 y+ s; f1 K' y2 K但我都希望佢無事,因太多垃圾戲,D濕9電影人係到瀨地硬!
作者: F.king    時間: 2005-4-30 07:08 AM

Originally posted by 短毛 at 2005-4-29 11:48 PM:
7 E, }$ Z1 k$ u0 f大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
) R) s; E0 R  L  M  I8 II agree you points that it could be illegal
% H* u' I: \9 x6 ?& lbut that is still a "gray area"
4 w* _. E8 n/ P- f' uwhoever win, it still makes us to feel that the result is unfair8 N( @4 u, w6 v# A. a
4 B! U3 G7 u1 @7 o
anyway, I want to say that is
" b2 U) F' G8 Qwho is supposed to be protected by laws; d( x% E& I/ x' b* u* a
creators?
& T$ c0 f$ Z/ H$ V$ Obut I think now they just only protect big companies but not the movies market. v; P9 ]& t, f( ]
let's them copy others ideas and produce lots of boring movies (not all) to earn our money./ T  ~, g2 E9 k6 Z+ M$ R3 G
when we are cheated by some shops, we can sue those
& V  h" X2 E. `8 F* ~: o! W) zWhy nothing protects consumers to choose a movies???
作者: junob04    時間: 2005-4-30 08:41 AM

Originally posted by dogson009 at 2005-4-29 10:03 PM:/ d; Z' G+ U0 k
其實我都唔肯定係咪真有其人=.=
- m, y( J0 t# j* G9 M
我都咁話,可能其實係班差佬為左想"空"我地,作個人出黎,做戲!!
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-30 09:58 AM

Originally posted by junob04 at 2005-4-30 08:41 AM:! l) J7 g! U* j: M

5 N+ {, J; u+ C( ~' e我都咁話,可能其實係班差佬為左想"空"我地,作個人出黎,做戲!!
5 \7 i  I3 ^6 G6 h: Z/ @唔係喎!1 |5 R; C5 [$ V* W0 J% w, J
古惑天皇響--- 嗰度好出名係大佬黎喎!! T6 G9 \$ `4 N) Q6 N" h
我以前都成日去download佢放出黎啲戲!
7 B( b# P5 {( D+ C佢真係好有熱誠嗰隻, 由舊到你諗唔起既戲到新到岩岩上畫既戲佢都有!! @- W; P; j, o% i9 L! v& b3 B; @
就係因為佢出名所以班pk先捕佢!
作者: 大家樂1234    時間: 2005-4-30 12:27 PM

希望佢無事
* [6 o% z4 B4 k! b3 l+ H一有先例以後就死嚕
作者: jason williams    時間: 2005-4-30 12:36 PM

honestly, i also use bt, but i know my action is totally incorrect!!!
% K0 n1 \* l; Q/ A4 xdun say nowadays movie is bad or not, downloan it is giving its face.......
/ ^: \5 X7 j8 q& Vif so bad, dun download la, right?
7 C0 y3 i9 m8 |+ Ri am dun shouting on all using bt guys, because i am also this guy^^
( y4 I8 @' S# D1 @: Y/ q- l/ m! ubut for the fact and 對事 to say, dl by bt really harm the company a lot, there is no excuse for using bt is a legal way and correct
4 r9 T3 y% q; ~& Pno need $$$ and need $, how to consider also no need $ is much more benfit la; `8 K6 M3 k- L) F& @( E' p, i
so what i always think is that, in this modern and high tech society
% U! `' V- E% \' R! ~3 _* g0 Nusing bt or winmx this kind of high tech should be graduately to take over buying CD or going to cinema.........
; k; c! a8 y$ s5 _7 r  b  twhy not develop this to takeover now condition? even need $$$ to dl, i think ppl would also accept (but sure the price should be lower as much more ppl would dl to overcome the production cost) BT really a very great invention !!!
8 ~; p9 |/ w$ D( X0 U, Jso, even they catch him or us, i only can say he or us are unlucky, but not incorrect way for them to do and custom also doing what they should do, so dun fxxking them la^^
作者: coolyiceman    時間: 2005-4-30 12:45 PM

罰款,冇留案底!0 \& U- [' N" M
佢又唔係殺人放火~~~1 H6 \- O: _+ \: F( B6 {9 _2 v( H
政府想比下馬威0的人~~9 a7 L' \! l- a
錢就一定罰* Q6 h; d/ _) ?5 a
未必要坐牢~~
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-30 01:31 PM

如果真係判佢有罪,
7 j5 w0 r1 F3 K/ L" m$ v唔知佢會唔會上訴呢?
, W! ~2 i/ s2 c9 ?* }3 t" e佢又失業既, 會唔會冇錢上訴呢?/ K3 ?9 a2 W/ q$ k; o
到時有冇人幫佢呢?!
作者: EV4886    時間: 2005-4-30 04:17 PM

最後同佢針掂,叫佢認左網上盜竊及行為不檢算數,網上盜竊就口頭警告(因知前有案例參考,條友網上盜竊人十幾萬地武器都係比口頭警告),而行為不檢就因初犯罰款HK$1000不留案底,咁大家都孝好落台d...
作者: @bcc@    時間: 2005-4-30 05:39 PM

冇事!!!!!:cool:
作者: 小虫    時間: 2005-4-30 06:05 PM

法官班報法令要幾個保鑣護送佢返屋企^_^
作者: 老鬼X    時間: 2005-5-1 01:54 PM

無奈！一定搞死佢　
作者: markmk    時間: 2005-5-3 04:29 AM

一定坐牢......殺雞警猴...仲要大字標題咁話俾bt友聽..
作者: 人人人人人    時間: 2005-5-3 06:09 PM

唉...試問有幾多人未用過BT??政府係都要搞呢D咁o既野, 多少都感到無奈
作者: ilovefuckingyou    時間: 2005-5-4 01:47 AM

告得入我切!!!
作者: bonzi1983    時間: 2005-5-4 05:40 AM

I think 古惑天皇 is immoral, but not illegal....so he is not guilty according to the law
作者: karenmoe    時間: 2005-5-5 01:14 AM

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-5-4 01:47 AM:
/ F! f; W* S: e% a/ q+ m( _告得入我切!!!
# X4 q6 Y9 N1 S  c我當初都估告唔入,
. L9 P* |0 T, v+ g+ p" u! p, g不過我老豆提醒我,政府咁多大狀,6 J& i* k& m: s" Y3 q' Z: t$ x+ ]
真係告唔入就唔會告啦.....
作者: timho1027    時間: 2005-5-5 03:34 AM

海關做戲給美國電影業睇. Q  O, J1 H( n# n
我希望佢冇事
作者: wolfevil    時間: 2005-5-5 10:08 PM

會有罪, 不過冇圖利and第一次, 最大可能會守行為
作者: 阿細    時間: 2005-5-5 10:54 PM

Originally posted by EV4886 at 2005-4-29 11:18 PM:
, l0 {1 J! g) x! S5 k美國咁講版權法都吾敢告BT,香港海關想扮勁想做世界法治一哥,輸.....輸硬.(除非又請人大釋法)
) j! s7 M3 u) P# p因為美國人權大過天...所以唔敢告用bt d人ja...香港海關想扮勁...就唔見得係la..大家都用緊份內事...
作者: kwajc    時間: 2005-5-6 08:58 AM

香港海關想做一場大龍鳳俾電影業d人睇......講真香港有成幾廿萬人用bt download野....拉晒番去邊到有咁多錢養呢班人呀!!!



歡迎光臨 娛樂滿紛 26FUN (http://26fun.com/bbs/) Powered by Discuz! 7.0.0