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!- J+ Q6 m4 y% B# i0 ?$ x
佢都係方便各網友啫!
) O: q" j" c6 Q; t  A0 R之前我都有好多套戲響佢度download.- p4 P5 ^! n& o. V
告得入就俾班仆街開到先例!
# X% T" Q% t/ [8 q0 z* T2 F% j我覺得bt係一個灰色地帶, 唔可能好definite話係侵權或犯法!# ^2 M: I5 L& g- \3 A
班友甘大回嚮甘狼都係感情因素居多!
% y9 Q0 M% _* A4 D' [純個人意見! 冇意開戰!亦不打算回應!: O( C, W( l& g( X2 g
1 {7 |/ i# y& P$ l/ a
[ 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 A7 D* n: r5 ~6 i) \
http://jm.g.free.fr/smileys/Xsmileys/iconsex----dog.gif
# f0 K' L1 r! A% @% _9 M; v+ f( \* A3 y" p7 h1 m
[ 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!
9 r' H" L2 ^7 v6 j0 H5 i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?
( |. a5 ]( c1 A3 G2 b$ 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 @) w. y" R: O$ {& P7 J
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!
; z7 E2 K& l. M) b$ k) `- W9 D/ ?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!/ D/ _. s- v0 y9 O9 ^; W( C
根本就荒天下之大謬!
/ {! o+ T: k7 V: k! {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!! s. i4 }9 H) O) j* k' l/ y
根本就荒天下之大謬!
- T+ n6 P$ R. r: \9 D1 [! l* 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.8 V" r# d; Y# ~" `
. K0 X* [8 H4 Q6 j
佢放種子俾人下載, 明顯地有動機讓其他人下載.6 K* W9 w5 l- J7 O$ `

+ p$ s, E6 i$ V' `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.+ p3 P+ F0 u! E$ j2 Q
1 o: S$ S0 c* o$ a
沒有意思偏幫那一方, 只希望大家可以討論一下.
) v/ z0 n7 f9 x8 m+ l: o! o: a6 j+ s6 I9 C! l; T) r
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
; I0 y* }1 @+ U- I% o0 i+ m要坐牢, 但政府財赤, 還要出錢養一個失業的人3 \9 _6 V$ y, c# i
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:
- I1 y. G; C3 E% Z6 B, R. Z- C0 {大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
& {! J# r! I  d* w7 U* [
vcd鋪通常一有新返既碟就對住大街大行黎播!
4 X! b5 k* @2 m) [/ k  U然後啲人睇睇下入去買咗!
- Y& Z  R# c  f9 z& @& S既牟利又侵權!* @' i: E) b$ k7 {) e% j  f0 ?
但亦大行其道....., \1 D( {% m9 J" @0 c* O
唉! 唔係話甘就唔代表bt係唔犯法定係點......  P  i% g: T) \% j
只係香港政府係多重標準!
  B9 H% r3 _: ?, k1 t" @4 ]同埋bt冇先例, 始終係灰色地帶!
6 p8 o2 q8 l  e5 {" ~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.....% ]3 @) Y# t, D0 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)5 Q+ r4 R4 @. e
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:2 y+ f7 T5 X4 p
大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
  A! G# p+ b' y" f9 e  k
I agree you points that it could be illegal  F9 F; O, b$ C; a
but that is still a "gray area"
6 `. p+ q( L% y: y7 n9 Owhoever win, it still makes us to feel that the result is unfair
) ^2 N# F$ u9 p$ c% s- u2 t9 T3 z  y8 Y. ]
anyway, I want to say that is
; X( z  y' j) \1 t- k7 X# u: uwho is supposed to be protected by laws3 n% J1 `; V9 D0 x% J4 _/ F
creators?
- s1 L3 T/ G7 E# u3 x% Fbut I think now they just only protect big companies but not the movies market
# r3 W# w' \% Y# }! w/ vlet's them copy others ideas and produce lots of boring movies (not all) to earn our money.: U# L: ^& g0 }: [# r! h9 i6 T" ?
when we are cheated by some shops, we can sue those
* z2 v) i, R4 x8 V' g$ QWhy 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:( p  Z9 G/ J  g/ H* ?: f6 S8 _1 ~+ N
其實我都唔肯定係咪真有其人=.=
6 F1 p: {/ l, x9 V1 u4 X5 ]4 `
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:
3 v$ ^9 h+ A' V/ X
: G& J1 p# w0 W6 B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!!
, W# ]8 {6 |& X! b唔係喎!$ f" U. e; g3 T( e( f9 J; P
古惑天皇響--- 嗰度好出名係大佬黎喎!
2 U+ P% m" v* Q2 N, G; |我以前都成日去download佢放出黎啲戲!+ H7 t3 e; M" |% |
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!, m, c% C4 }. K4 C2 T: b* S
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
9 D" p' h- \8 T4 x2 t/ c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!!!3 ^) Q( _. M& R! W+ v# ]
dun say nowadays movie is bad or not, downloan it is giving its face.......
% n: _  `+ ~2 x* d; P( Z5 eif so bad, dun download la, right?, G) K( }! v7 e4 L. v4 c
i am dun shouting on all using bt guys, because i am also this guy^^
/ f  g+ x: S/ P$ T2 abut 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# Y4 ^% N1 h1 }/ N
no need $$$ and need $, how to consider also no need $ is much more benfit la
1 Y. d+ D5 a$ F+ X0 @6 P  m6 ~6 Eso what i always think is that, in this modern and high tech society
. J- J# A- X) }  r6 l! v$ F9 ^using bt or winmx this kind of high tech should be graduately to take over buying CD or going to cinema.........
2 O/ A! o) D3 y4 rwhy not develop this to takeover now condition? even need $$$ 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 !!!) k) Z* q" ?$ _- j
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!6 C; @+ H1 [& ~/ w/ J
佢又唔係殺人放火~~~" i' e. o- ]( p; O# S  }3 l; |
政府想比下馬威0的人~~
2 r# |! f1 k- i0 [. V* w6 i錢就一定罰
5 [1 v! d0 b6 @1 K$ h' {1 Q0 W- X- }1 b未必要坐牢~~
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-30 01:31 PM

如果真係判佢有罪,$ f, ~$ \! L: U5 _8 U
唔知佢會唔會上訴呢?# _2 e( y# S) }1 A9 |0 u
佢又失業既, 會唔會冇錢上訴呢?
) m( l# s) d: y, G: B+ |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:
: _1 g% h& e5 ]告得入我切!!!
& y/ J: i& t# Z; t
我當初都估告唔入,
2 J9 E1 H& L) f" G) \) I7 n不過我老豆提醒我,政府咁多大狀,1 X; u) c, N+ V" [' P2 T6 \
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
; ]+ x% H7 W3 ]8 [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:
) t& a) O) m; ~: G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)
% c/ W! `* g: f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