娛樂滿紛 26FUN - Powered by Discuz! Board

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!3 N& j' y, N) `& A. o" P* a
佢都係方便各網友啫!# k* N( A5 Y' m( M0 e
之前我都有好多套戲響佢度download.
告得入就俾班仆街開到先例!" |7 R6 N9 r$ k2 A/ M
我覺得bt係一個灰色地帶, 唔可能好definite話係侵權或犯法!. p; H5 o8 g3 R3 H1 R7 b3 |$ k
班友甘大回嚮甘狼都係感情因素居多!( `) M5 [) _# G( A3 r
純個人意見! 冇意開戰!亦不打算回應!

[ 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
http://jm.g.free.fr/smileys/Xsmileys/iconsex----dog.gif

[ 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!8 U4 r( X& X/ l
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?
"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 D# i$ ^9 W( ?3 l7 ~
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!8 u9 z# l: P& q8 C; U/ 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!
根本就荒天下之大謬!( P* y [$ M1 K9 f1 A2 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!) H3 q; I/ w; b2 w7 _
根本就荒天下之大謬!
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.; ~/ U5 z# m% o) x, T7 W2 J

佢放種子俾人下載, 明顯地有動機讓其他人下載.2 K" B4 z, [/ J0 K, h. m. d

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.

沒有意思偏幫那一方, 只希望大家可以討論一下.9 _/ b2 q5 H4 P. A x& K% `0 b
V+ `4 J% R% u/ M$ e: K! E
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. `, N+ T/ z x5 e
要坐牢, 但政府財赤, 還要出錢養一個失業的人
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:6 ?/ f& [7 v7 H2 V# }' j3 F0 t
大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...

4 \$ T8 c! _5 T8 ~
vcd鋪通常一有新返既碟就對住大街大行黎播!
然後啲人睇睇下入去買咗!% N# f9 d9 d: A& F9 I
既牟利又侵權!
但亦大行其道.....7 f1 F7 ?9 s8 s9 Q
唉! 唔係話甘就唔代表bt係唔犯法定係點......- l4 v4 O2 h: P" V
只係香港政府係多重標準!
同埋bt冇先例, 始終係灰色地帶!
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.....
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)
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:- T/ W) m Y2 g) a' t5 E! [* c- Q
大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...

9 b7 i, Q7 `! c A7 c! B
I agree you points that it could be illegal
but that is still a "gray area"
whoever win, it still makes us to feel that the result is unfair
$ _) z* _* X4 t3 T# g2 Y# j
anyway, I want to say that is; {" {% r" Q; n: ~* I2 c/ l2 ?' O
who is supposed to be protected by laws
creators?
but I think now they just only protect big companies but not the movies market$ z+ N2 w1 G! G# k% b7 w
let's them copy others ideas and produce lots of boring movies (not all) to earn our money.
when we are cheated by some shops, we can sue those, \2 S: i3 l0 y- E" b1 q
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:& ~* q! ]# e c* e; O
其實我都唔肯定係咪真有其人=.=

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:) V% J8 n Q9 c2 F* P; Q8 S
" b2 s8 ]! a$ H( L' R
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!!

. \% M! S. G. k4 W
唔係喎!5 A3 b6 k( u# [) T- n+ ^4 o
古惑天皇響--- 嗰度好出名係大佬黎喎!/ y* O( e* C( M D7 b2 ^1 a
我以前都成日去download佢放出黎啲戲!' ^" i& a; t, h6 N' N$ B1 n
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!
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
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!!!
dun say nowadays movie is bad or not, downloan it is giving its face.......& u: X5 e, R2 {7 z1 ~4 C5 q$ J
if so bad, dun download la, right?$ ]/ r* s9 J: p
i am dun shouting on all using bt guys, because i am also this guy^^
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
no need $$$ and need $, how to consider also no need $ is much more benfit la, X/ f- m: ]0 Q( L3 I: O
so what i always think is that, in this modern and high tech society
using bt or winmx this kind of high tech should be graduately to take over buying CD or going to cinema.........+ P0 d9 w" S3 @ O# s g& j( R& G" Z/ E
why not develop this to takeover now condition? even need $$$ 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 !!!
so, 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!8 G) ?7 U2 z$ R* O8 N% z
佢又唔係殺人放火~~~
政府想比下馬威0的人~~: z' W- Z3 M o& e, ^0 b) A4 B( T
錢就一定罰2 Z7 S/ z: Z& B7 g, I2 a" Y
未必要坐牢~~

作者: HansChan 時間: 2005-4-30 01:31 PM

如果真係判佢有罪,5 D$ ~. a2 V9 ^" ^, i' Y1 ]
唔知佢會唔會上訴呢?* c! r5 _, P* p9 v; I2 r, }
佢又失業既, 會唔會冇錢上訴呢?& x" S' X g" ~$ 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:
: ^. w2 |9 g; H告得入我切!!!

我當初都估告唔入,3 B! H3 d( f5 f) N) f6 ^
不過我老豆提醒我,政府咁多大狀,
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8 {& ^; U% X7 {- t. `
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:5 j" {5 f- n' P! Z" r$ U0 b
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)

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/bbs7/)