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!: J1 A) t+ i/ g! r# I$ d
佢都係方便各網友啫!
+ U; s1 B$ Z7 ]* f& F之前我都有好多套戲響佢度download.) m+ E) I# P8 @" Z/ X# f
告得入就俾班仆街開到先例!
6 b3 l5 M. ?( V" Y我覺得bt係一個灰色地帶, 唔可能好definite話係侵權或犯法!
3 ]; ], w3 ^3 P4 F. ^* M1 g1 y7 `班友甘大回嚮甘狼都係感情因素居多!( c0 Z" U4 |0 `& C+ j( g: `7 [' t
純個人意見! 冇意開戰!亦不打算回應!
) n! }/ y" Z) e5 {" S) L# Y2 A
; e1 u7 {+ G3 f/ B% W  m[ 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 3 Q0 B& ?- O  d1 ^  `
http://jm.g.free.fr/smileys/Xsmileys/iconsex----dog.gif
7 O/ u- M6 O3 c& j* P1 L1 ~/ Q8 p) }
[ 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!
6 j* K* M5 P0 w6 A) L5 P6 G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?
# {9 V1 c) W3 B# |0 f6 r" c"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!
5 e0 X" w* r5 h( `5 X4 J9 {& o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!
3 v) f# y; K; _, }6 Y8 Y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!
, T; I% N0 L5 `" f根本就荒天下之大謬!
3 t- F4 v: ~/ c: K, X9 Z1 I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 Q- N/ k- G/ D' h" O; A) e
根本就荒天下之大謬!( v( ?$ a, H! R4 v7 Q
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.
: m: s+ J- i4 H
% D: f3 C1 T. u2 R) Q7 R4 @佢放種子俾人下載, 明顯地有動機讓其他人下載.0 j5 ^; @2 H! P% }. S3 ^
: X& p' H; t0 D. L; ^# r7 c* s  @. g
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.
! g. n# U) m. E2 G0 b% J6 H3 I( v2 S# D" S+ q: z
沒有意思偏幫那一方, 只希望大家可以討論一下.
8 M* \4 P7 s3 S3 D: {# P9 M1 Q# E" d7 X* V9 S+ k6 q  i2 n7 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
" X- \( U1 l7 ]" ~要坐牢, 但政府財赤, 還要出錢養一個失業的人/ G# Q/ m3 \9 G6 K+ b  W
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* n: U) W9 R+ h. N) L大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
- k: ~7 X/ i. Gvcd鋪通常一有新返既碟就對住大街大行黎播! ) l1 R3 j$ r# Y- Z: E! c
然後啲人睇睇下入去買咗!
% x& \7 ?! W( H. S$ B- [既牟利又侵權!8 a/ @$ r& X. O* g) W' f$ Z' ^
但亦大行其道.....* v: g( M8 @( P$ |
唉! 唔係話甘就唔代表bt係唔犯法定係點......; s6 E* D, V8 g3 t3 J% c/ V
只係香港政府係多重標準!
6 g. @/ P2 S/ f9 h( V同埋bt冇先例, 始終係灰色地帶!
! v& F0 y% ^0 ]  `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.....& f% j, y$ T1 _
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 `1 G. p/ Z7 x. j7 z; N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:
9 a3 T4 A- {! u! u大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
, i; E( y0 B- [( F/ C, S3 Y5 V6 QI agree you points that it could be illegal
* E0 H: _5 z* q1 Kbut that is still a "gray area"
% I1 G0 n$ q" c5 \whoever win, it still makes us to feel that the result is unfair" {- {4 p4 D7 P, U+ O
2 P. R8 e! l! m5 I' z! d
anyway, I want to say that is
8 I4 ~+ a+ ]5 y$ Z% D! ^who is supposed to be protected by laws
+ P+ m% m2 p5 Y! T" C1 |creators?
# Z. ]% w+ C) m3 Q. cbut I think now they just only protect big companies but not the movies market
" U$ r5 R* B: Z2 ~+ m8 S$ ]let's them copy others ideas and produce lots of boring movies (not all) to earn our money.
( i% B8 h5 \0 O6 U( W% Y# ?when we are cheated by some shops, we can sue those9 e- b6 N5 ]/ t5 `
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:% [& x0 H9 F( W1 w8 o. u3 B
其實我都唔肯定係咪真有其人=.=
! b8 O+ i# j" l+ R1 [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; R$ ?1 {1 h" r
2 b+ c& E8 U! \5 W! _* Z, f+ H
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!!
4 m( C" c' o$ V5 l/ e' \唔係喎!
: h: \% p: k4 b- d古惑天皇響--- 嗰度好出名係大佬黎喎!
( V0 T! {& ?4 G( D7 I( }; R$ w我以前都成日去download佢放出黎啲戲!3 F" M- r" W; ~- 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!
4 v. S$ ~* Z+ \. \' e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
5 \2 z1 i1 a1 ~$ F5 k' c1 h, G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!!!
8 o4 ^7 j% [4 ?1 Odun say nowadays movie is bad or not, downloan it is giving its face.......6 b9 t" c0 a. o$ Z6 p$ j( I9 L+ k
if so bad, dun download la, right?; D9 `% P; ]& N5 U' k1 ~8 E. s9 V
i am dun shouting on all using bt guys, because i am also this guy^^
2 f9 O! R+ r! ]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) M( P1 Z+ K1 [% _  Z( ~9 [
no need $$$ and need $, how to consider also no need $ is much more benfit la# P: V0 ~- \9 e' S4 \
so what i always think is that, in this modern and high tech society& M& p' w8 h1 n: F( F6 Z
using bt or winmx this kind of high tech should be graduately to take over buying CD or going to cinema.........
  b% k1 ~6 M0 T) Y' cwhy not develop this to takeover now condition? even need $$$ 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 !!!) g- e4 K- i& ~7 \( d
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!) P3 E4 H1 g8 l) l/ m
佢又唔係殺人放火~~~
: R3 d- h5 @  O& V4 s: h/ n1 Q政府想比下馬威0的人~~% D6 {0 m- k" u  _3 ]
錢就一定罰/ l1 f  d1 @0 q3 D
未必要坐牢~~
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-30 01:31 PM

如果真係判佢有罪,
0 I( l0 M! p7 S) s2 `唔知佢會唔會上訴呢?6 ^3 u5 N  u: q. o3 @) Z
佢又失業既, 會唔會冇錢上訴呢?
& V9 ?- @9 v4 {! T$ U) D- D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:* s- T% q% D: G2 y6 w! d
告得入我切!!!
6 d8 Z# w. _- P  x, s- e1 H% Z我當初都估告唔入,
  ~9 m- W# u, ?5 G  y+ I5 [( P  ~' ^不過我老豆提醒我,政府咁多大狀,
. C$ x' w3 A/ d3 X3 \! y- q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
+ i# P1 U# n; ^( F8 o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:
) K( t: p8 I  {+ W6 Z8 }3 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)
. i7 i) }, R# ?8 |: w- o+ l0 n6 G
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/bbs7/) Powered by Discuz! 7.0.0