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!" T6 X' O* S& S5 g, T. x- M; G1 I! [
佢都係方便各網友啫!
' W, r1 Y& H7 @' d# Z, k. s* h之前我都有好多套戲響佢度download.
+ C- u+ B8 o1 y3 _% c; Y告得入就俾班仆街開到先例!7 j( v8 _0 W' ^
我覺得bt係一個灰色地帶, 唔可能好definite話係侵權或犯法!
* N) B- ?" ^) D* c& W% j$ U班友甘大回嚮甘狼都係感情因素居多!
& R: l5 U+ X) M0 V9 q$ f1 X! Y純個人意見! 冇意開戰!亦不打算回應!
, Q5 W: _  {# y7 G. N
8 w0 C9 A0 D" H  s[ 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
6 M' a0 g) R7 h( P6 {http://jm.g.free.fr/smileys/Xsmileys/iconsex----dog.gif! v0 u2 C4 a3 a3 q
9 h4 q' n! z$ W9 ?, q1 i
[ 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!
$ f( k$ ~% q. i/ o6 t  B5 C$ 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?* U3 v6 I5 x) S+ O) i* O- q8 y0 h
"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!9 \4 I+ r9 n+ A' U
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!% H: r/ u5 t3 K1 |* x9 I
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!- v/ X9 A8 E+ z7 W/ |/ v( \
根本就荒天下之大謬!, ]3 x, ~- o  W/ f" ]
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!" _- P: M; n* `" w, J1 \0 {1 a
根本就荒天下之大謬!* U3 k4 D, P+ d5 i
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.+ @+ u$ o; t' y
% p% T. A6 Z1 x  |) E
佢放種子俾人下載, 明顯地有動機讓其他人下載.; `' N: t! M( y; @

; B* z! |- 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.  C$ G' m& v: v! C. ~# Y3 H* v

  Y8 g" M. {: R沒有意思偏幫那一方, 只希望大家可以討論一下.& B/ ~$ j3 o$ X) ?. L
" H! Z* B4 }2 Z1 ]; m+ I; W
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  R& }! B1 d# w/ S, n
要坐牢, 但政府財赤, 還要出錢養一個失業的人
" ~' O  k" h7 G' M6 V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:
# h& G. k% u! f3 j) d大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
9 U- N' N' q  F, d4 y; O
vcd鋪通常一有新返既碟就對住大街大行黎播! , F: `% j& T* n9 _9 G# y' d3 E
然後啲人睇睇下入去買咗!: Q0 V+ B  ^% `, p' J: @9 G
既牟利又侵權!
7 I" m+ S& R$ K1 B7 ?但亦大行其道.....; ^3 z& ^9 o2 M  Z/ u
唉! 唔係話甘就唔代表bt係唔犯法定係點......$ m% Y- ^! i: i9 G  R0 I, h3 O
只係香港政府係多重標準!
" n; ?. j9 e6 l( b0 i同埋bt冇先例, 始終係灰色地帶!. P' f# f. A$ s* v  `- |  K
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....." O. x; Z% `& z* M/ m9 i4 e9 z* n
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)
! T; F, V5 W! v( 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:" V7 P; B* q7 E* o. E; H
大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
- T1 B0 K" c7 \2 r( e6 OI agree you points that it could be illegal
6 t, q7 E7 E# n$ [" Q' @# Ibut that is still a "gray area"% ~& H. B# C2 E* P1 T
whoever win, it still makes us to feel that the result is unfair8 Q( y% x6 {! k
* t  h8 x# X% m; E9 t
anyway, I want to say that is
  e& _# c5 Q% dwho is supposed to be protected by laws
7 ?1 p$ ^2 n9 Ecreators?
$ f- v% y/ s! a' _! fbut I think now they just only protect big companies but not the movies market
, \0 v* Q& b/ s5 flet's them copy others ideas and produce lots of boring movies (not all) to earn our money.
0 d$ j5 {) R0 p: Zwhen we are cheated by some shops, we can sue those# H& [/ a8 ]$ R6 X2 D
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:9 T' r5 Y% s1 t! s$ ~7 z
其實我都唔肯定係咪真有其人=.=
0 |4 h) v: O, Q5 q9 x' T$ v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:* w6 [4 u+ @+ M9 B  K) s" r8 k

1 f0 t) M8 ^+ H( v: g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!!
# @' P) c5 C% j
唔係喎!, E9 U8 Z4 n( ]* A, n
古惑天皇響--- 嗰度好出名係大佬黎喎!
7 C( ?/ [  G8 i9 X1 x# }+ _我以前都成日去download佢放出黎啲戲!
. n6 o) f* P. ~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!# i. q  J2 M6 K! V5 `
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 `' ?8 ^( w2 D( \9 T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!!!
+ @! _  q  {" ^( X: wdun say nowadays movie is bad or not, downloan it is giving its face......., F& q) F8 h% h4 q  O. @6 S
if so bad, dun download la, right?& X% \; T( J1 {5 n, V" B6 v
i am dun shouting on all using bt guys, because i am also this guy^^
* ^+ J4 P- x- F9 g( [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
! n. J% V4 C/ z1 r6 uno need $$$ and need $, how to consider also no need $ is much more benfit la3 u5 V1 |' s( ?9 E; u+ t+ a. ^
so what i always think is that, in this modern and high tech society- P7 `; I9 i4 ?5 j, E( L+ Y) ~, J4 q
using bt or winmx this kind of high tech should be graduately to take over buying CD or going to cinema.........
! |& Q/ |% w" t4 V+ j, C% T1 Qwhy not develop this to takeover now condition? even need $$$ 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 |; a: y) }& k0 c0 o, Q
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!
- `& h! ?2 V6 F6 _4 J; X' n佢又唔係殺人放火~~~
* }8 G. C8 n9 @7 _) z! o+ j6 T政府想比下馬威0的人~~8 i) I( k# X# \$ d  V5 f
錢就一定罰3 ^/ L  R( E7 C) f9 E$ U. m3 o
未必要坐牢~~
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-30 01:31 PM

如果真係判佢有罪,
3 N1 ]! z0 S$ {4 \/ Z唔知佢會唔會上訴呢?
' q9 m8 I4 i( e佢又失業既, 會唔會冇錢上訴呢?- Z# n$ B/ Q" V' A+ c% \1 z6 s; [! }- _
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:# U  d8 ]' P% H- E. z# h
告得入我切!!!
0 \' @" K( U6 {& e  b我當初都估告唔入,* i7 k1 ]# ]+ K# l8 I9 i3 c
不過我老豆提醒我,政府咁多大狀,
; N6 G3 i2 Y- k! }* ^5 D5 l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 K& c6 I, n: ?6 f. Z$ I# B; g; I
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:9 K( H7 N! _  \+ Z" S5 W- o
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)
- S: I- X# K- c( d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://www.26fun.com/bbs/) Powered by Discuz! 7.0.0