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!" u4 l  v: P! P% A$ d0 c
佢都係方便各網友啫!
) t. P; l9 y/ ?* \7 e之前我都有好多套戲響佢度download.+ B! C9 N# B" C$ r7 p
告得入就俾班仆街開到先例!
& a6 ]) k9 H+ u8 T我覺得bt係一個灰色地帶, 唔可能好definite話係侵權或犯法!
: t& f# r1 Y, z3 E班友甘大回嚮甘狼都係感情因素居多!
" e+ P6 P* C& K) _# |1 P純個人意見! 冇意開戰!亦不打算回應!8 x' [9 G" ~8 k% N+ t9 Y* I1 d2 E* H

5 L3 O* }7 n, Y, m8 m$ v2 D8 h[ 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 Y5 J# T% y# a  Q, V6 W8 Jhttp://jm.g.free.fr/smileys/Xsmileys/iconsex----dog.gif
) @/ R( A+ J4 A( ?8 |% y0 G. B2 ~. {4 @7 d: x' `& E$ H
[ 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!3 _4 s! s+ l1 R5 R& 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?
& M5 U& ?4 Z- n3 X( F% X8 k"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!
6 G( T/ m& U! a" E( W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!
7 S7 P8 D: I4 L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!1 x3 D$ z  |! n% l# d2 _  \) O6 {
根本就荒天下之大謬!
$ A9 m/ m6 t9 T+ p( p1 C( U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!
( f+ n# }4 O/ H7 n# W4 y, J8 y根本就荒天下之大謬!- t. ~$ y- D1 B, C8 ^
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." A* g# O) b1 x

1 H. R) ~% v1 q5 ?' @% w; X" ^佢放種子俾人下載, 明顯地有動機讓其他人下載.9 ]9 d* u- P7 E* ]; O4 K# j) q& p! n

7 J, T0 r; V& ~* o. b1 O6 M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.
$ [/ j! o0 ?0 X  r9 Q
- w4 X. c1 v3 F( l7 z% ^4 q& h1 ^' K沒有意思偏幫那一方, 只希望大家可以討論一下., ^+ q7 D' |* z0 N
& ?* W7 R5 ]+ r% @% A2 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
9 L1 c6 Y' ^+ _/ z) T4 x要坐牢, 但政府財赤, 還要出錢養一個失業的人' x8 F& W" E; g
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:
; q# J/ e8 I2 `6 n. E0 j大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
9 M1 r2 O$ a- f, G% r2 D, yvcd鋪通常一有新返既碟就對住大街大行黎播!
# Q. ?) O' x5 a; ]! F9 Q8 m' Q然後啲人睇睇下入去買咗!# X  F! Y6 @6 t7 h5 k
既牟利又侵權!
8 ~2 u, I+ H4 {' \但亦大行其道.....
; g/ q/ U2 Y, V6 v+ o4 y1 b. X( v唉! 唔係話甘就唔代表bt係唔犯法定係點......
0 ~( I  T+ I+ t0 d  k只係香港政府係多重標準!3 w* p; W) u+ z& f) A' f$ D0 W/ Y
同埋bt冇先例, 始終係灰色地帶!7 q" g* I, {- b$ ~% i
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.....
" l) [1 z" R5 E) ?* k% O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)
, s/ {( {& x. ?' z' X  M$ b6 l+ \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:
, Q( u9 P8 u! b: M) [大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
% h" s2 o" a; V! ?, n0 M/ Q
I agree you points that it could be illegal
" X* M/ J2 W2 F$ g& \8 Lbut that is still a "gray area"
) I! z. o+ a3 N8 r/ q- C& u: Ewhoever win, it still makes us to feel that the result is unfair
4 M9 _2 E& i. G2 X
7 e3 @# z6 b+ A' @1 I( Wanyway, I want to say that is+ g) A1 m4 J# d. t, r+ e4 {) L
who is supposed to be protected by laws; _* `$ ~* s' H" \. X: P: j; ~
creators?
; E( d1 R! d3 |) W; t. X4 S6 q; s/ Jbut I think now they just only protect big companies but not the movies market
  V! p" {, j- J+ ?6 I& P3 |# vlet's them copy others ideas and produce lots of boring movies (not all) to earn our money.
, B" z8 t! L& [) q' pwhen we are cheated by some shops, we can sue those
9 S& O9 G) e+ ?4 d5 eWhy 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:
; x" }1 H' \6 t8 x/ ]其實我都唔肯定係咪真有其人=.=
0 j( u8 X& T3 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!!
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-30 09:58 AM

Originally posted by junob04 at 2005-4-30 08:41 AM:: h" Z1 ~# I; M

/ O# }6 p2 M# b8 @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!!
$ h7 G! J- Y, g. U3 ?
唔係喎!
  B8 i* }0 w/ V( ?" {古惑天皇響--- 嗰度好出名係大佬黎喎!/ @# z3 s* A, G+ u" @0 V  e
我以前都成日去download佢放出黎啲戲!
; ]' x3 g! N1 z5 V' J- x, a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!! u" w8 `/ j+ |8 t7 x  i
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
1 L: U( z$ R  x$ S. I- p8 i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!!!- V7 Y- z6 ~0 B* M. n
dun say nowadays movie is bad or not, downloan it is giving its face.......
9 E5 @- Z. G7 L9 v0 H2 w2 Gif so bad, dun download la, right?
# }8 n  p& f7 t0 c1 w  E0 yi am dun shouting on all using bt guys, because i am also this guy^^
# c. T- O# T' S  rbut 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 correct0 j. j7 X, X0 p  j! G
no need $$$ and need $, how to consider also no need $ is much more benfit la
2 C- \! E) z8 q4 b6 B+ R" }) X: ?8 Tso what i always think is that, in this modern and high tech society7 x( H' c$ c1 Y, z+ {* r! R& [8 S+ T
using bt or winmx this kind of high tech should be graduately to take over buying CD or going to cinema........." o& b  ^5 `0 K
why not develop this to takeover now condition? even need $$$ 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 !!!
4 {  r+ P7 [& Y, a1 T9 K5 cso, 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!
& p5 o9 x% v) v4 W佢又唔係殺人放火~~~1 A* ?$ [7 l5 K# Y
政府想比下馬威0的人~~0 ~! n4 ~8 M( ^8 _# P
錢就一定罰( g) k0 {* N8 o9 V& U$ N( M4 F
未必要坐牢~~
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-30 01:31 PM

如果真係判佢有罪,
2 `8 D9 z% [3 f' z0 z2 p  P% t- T唔知佢會唔會上訴呢?
; T( r- ~5 V# C0 Z6 X; g佢又失業既, 會唔會冇錢上訴呢?; C3 T- a1 D4 o7 D% Y
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:
6 K6 G, ^0 U1 x! C+ Z  g告得入我切!!!
# v* s' M: h/ ^# T- c. w1 ^
我當初都估告唔入,
: O2 }2 Z3 Z' k不過我老豆提醒我,政府咁多大狀,
2 w8 Z* O) ?5 b; X( }9 }. n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* }1 e3 |/ h' m5 }4 _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:( O& M' N- a3 r) _
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)
) U. I2 ?$ ~: n' B% z/ h9 i. [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