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!
! X; ~: W! t, U8 }2 e佢都係方便各網友啫!
! s: w2 T4 H+ D3 r" c( M& h7 p之前我都有好多套戲響佢度download.
+ v# U: h" t& M0 r8 O告得入就俾班仆街開到先例!
2 S! A5 y' r7 N7 x7 [  `( z  v4 \  u我覺得bt係一個灰色地帶, 唔可能好definite話係侵權或犯法!- D3 b; F8 B, c$ X+ m+ z
班友甘大回嚮甘狼都係感情因素居多!* _; e6 v6 k' ^
純個人意見! 冇意開戰!亦不打算回應!
# j4 v, w0 f' G- b$ e8 S; x8 F0 ^7 `7 z' z& K
[ 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
4 j2 w5 `' Q( p0 C0 ]# v% U* [, H. {http://jm.g.free.fr/smileys/Xsmileys/iconsex----dog.gif
4 f+ W  C7 h; ]1 Z
% |2 ^, O  ?9 X# Q$ K[ 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!
. K' m! u* T; z, d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?
% H# ^7 O! O  U, R% ?. v( q"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!3 i/ p5 `* j( ?8 i0 `
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!6 c( K7 m, O! v% K1 o
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!4 r3 P; M: g* G. `3 x  z; V2 h. d
根本就荒天下之大謬!
, y4 u+ K1 y& N3 {' X7 p4 A6 t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!9 w( U5 ~; z9 D5 ~/ q5 z0 J! }
根本就荒天下之大謬!7 V1 H( p: o; {9 r/ o" n
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.5 J2 v: `6 |. U. {
# c7 \. J/ I; ?( g; Y
佢放種子俾人下載, 明顯地有動機讓其他人下載.
+ [. r3 C7 _8 d, o; h; e& p
% W" j7 O2 j% {- {% g% B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.4 e4 [6 M0 o+ a: {

8 x% C+ {" U7 m沒有意思偏幫那一方, 只希望大家可以討論一下.8 _+ V  s, k: b! }; x, D; c; D1 y

5 C0 H$ f- H% v  n! V% H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
5 y9 `# Y5 a' @: x- m6 c要坐牢, 但政府財赤, 還要出錢養一個失業的人
3 \% j; n) A; ]+ |' e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:
+ u0 J8 _3 b& O. s' `1 ^大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
( x6 g4 \/ F( W# z) @3 d
vcd鋪通常一有新返既碟就對住大街大行黎播! 6 o) p% G3 s( D# D' e; s
然後啲人睇睇下入去買咗!, C4 H9 p: F8 E. D. ~0 `; J, o
既牟利又侵權!* [( w( I/ m9 ?# v9 ^2 B3 @4 l1 D9 m
但亦大行其道.....
4 U, o+ O& F: z唉! 唔係話甘就唔代表bt係唔犯法定係點......' ?0 G7 C& D) ^6 N6 i1 ~
只係香港政府係多重標準!8 |8 e, o0 I1 u
同埋bt冇先例, 始終係灰色地帶!) q4 x* L% o% E: k  Y
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.....
/ |4 K( R0 Y% w6 F; v; w- T) @6 ?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)
2 O" N3 R/ s  _0 r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:
/ i+ u$ q; K: [/ k大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
' a  n" i$ M% M+ n$ m) I4 VI agree you points that it could be illegal
; H+ o+ e' G& Tbut that is still a "gray area"4 t! Y1 c' v7 {5 g" n5 B; U
whoever win, it still makes us to feel that the result is unfair
, L# ]* p% P5 ]6 Q: R# Z) r5 A1 j. h) F3 L  _- f
anyway, I want to say that is! w2 ]6 J2 e1 ~9 K
who is supposed to be protected by laws
# A' \1 d3 Y$ ], p' K: q9 }creators?
: o* M6 N0 J. [$ [, obut I think now they just only protect big companies but not the movies market
) Z+ @1 O2 w, ?4 Jlet's them copy others ideas and produce lots of boring movies (not all) to earn our money.
3 n* \( I; n) n% }- K" c# P- Ewhen we are cheated by some shops, we can sue those( l+ T9 l; U( n
Why 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:
3 F% P9 j- d3 K' m! P" b其實我都唔肯定係咪真有其人=.=
! ?1 v' ]4 P* ~& p  ?( O
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:" M, @  f6 o; j* q! e& L/ c. ^

+ w, D  {3 P% x) I' U' 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!!
% O# g# q  @6 R% w4 L8 {
唔係喎!
0 W# J$ P' w6 w6 r) \( v( W古惑天皇響--- 嗰度好出名係大佬黎喎!
2 _7 O: {$ w) \7 A- y我以前都成日去download佢放出黎啲戲!# w1 M0 I7 j% B7 v1 f
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!
/ A! X; ]- {9 L1 z. j5 i! t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4 X6 W# y( N/ o* F& 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!!!. y8 L3 s5 j7 t) D
dun say nowadays movie is bad or not, downloan it is giving its face.......
* A* s7 l$ P8 bif so bad, dun download la, right?. X6 p9 Z6 X; c- E
i am dun shouting on all using bt guys, because i am also this guy^^* p& h( H7 K/ v
but 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% j) I4 [- ^* T( U: L1 A% M6 v
no need $$$ and need $, how to consider also no need $ is much more benfit la: T& \) }# n! P  `! ]
so what i always think is that, in this modern and high tech society
- ~  B( D/ |$ Y! }. z. v8 m7 |6 Eusing bt or winmx this kind of high tech should be graduately to take over buying CD or going to cinema.........
- @0 c9 ^4 b! a$ Y, [& [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 !!!
3 Z2 [: t* U7 T  y9 iso, 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!) l! \  {! y0 ]* l6 L
佢又唔係殺人放火~~~
2 t! {* v; H5 p$ b! L9 `政府想比下馬威0的人~~# \8 }: W% s% p; |! `' A* d
錢就一定罰' G0 k0 i2 W8 ~- I4 b0 h8 `& T' p
未必要坐牢~~
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-30 01:31 PM

如果真係判佢有罪,
6 a) A. n1 L7 H8 K5 _& Z唔知佢會唔會上訴呢?
& G5 `5 N$ t" o4 R佢又失業既, 會唔會冇錢上訴呢?3 P  f$ E2 n% R8 }3 Q$ g" H7 s; L/ A
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:/ p9 p$ r; p$ |2 U( d  S9 T
告得入我切!!!
2 r& }# g; y5 x  p4 N1 i# B我當初都估告唔入,! o  C0 C% _: O' B: K- ^  {
不過我老豆提醒我,政府咁多大狀,
5 K2 s. u! d: o4 L' ]- l; O1 P5 }8 C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
2 e9 U' u" h6 t2 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:
% ~, A( ]) S: |, Z8 w& ~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)
0 O, U7 T7 c- M# 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