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!" M' u8 M) l7 l7 }/ U
佢都係方便各網友啫!
; n4 F) {1 K2 J之前我都有好多套戲響佢度download.
6 U3 L$ [1 n& }9 F. k8 i) `告得入就俾班仆街開到先例!0 {6 T* L5 a- o0 N3 l! @
我覺得bt係一個灰色地帶, 唔可能好definite話係侵權或犯法!4 q& M, P2 F, ?2 H8 E3 a5 g& I
班友甘大回嚮甘狼都係感情因素居多!
. G  [2 L* f  M4 b: a& I純個人意見! 冇意開戰!亦不打算回應!
# A' {# s# r1 D. m& }6 ^  `2 I% R% Z/ C' Z* k( E  t$ Q
[ 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 $ _1 a2 w* i7 j+ b& v: ]$ K# A
http://jm.g.free.fr/smileys/Xsmileys/iconsex----dog.gif# O' E/ d! q. V4 q
+ p, `8 m: O; L" s( e" h7 U  L
[ 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!- S% w. j& \. z! b3 B6 x. r
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?6 }4 N3 W" x6 \1 i. 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!
7 ]+ y- r( z6 y" q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!
0 w6 |8 H3 v8 _* D0 h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!. i% V, R( Y% X0 @% r2 ~0 ^
根本就荒天下之大謬!
4 g% a3 K9 \! \6 b4 y3 d0 N- a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!
: B! v4 S8 x! I1 t+ \1 V# [+ c根本就荒天下之大謬!
4 t; I/ i# Y3 A9 e/ b, O/ G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.' F& ]- A& g4 F9 X5 D

& J! g' d) W/ C+ z& L佢放種子俾人下載, 明顯地有動機讓其他人下載.
. P8 ?% K2 t" V* U# k
* \4 A0 n  ~; F% z/ \+ E) G1 }5 m# 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.
7 E9 V4 T8 `- Q4 ^% J  N1 |
$ S. N9 H- f. \沒有意思偏幫那一方, 只希望大家可以討論一下.! G& ~4 m0 E4 p% U/ X- {

; D; E2 c: e2 v( z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
+ m0 Z) g, s, s; }. u% \( J. p要坐牢, 但政府財赤, 還要出錢養一個失業的人
& L& J9 @$ ]/ C5 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:- t  I+ ]! O5 |2 e3 M$ Q1 [- H$ l/ L& u
大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
* z/ o, u9 \% E+ [+ Dvcd鋪通常一有新返既碟就對住大街大行黎播!
# Y$ }9 Q2 v$ }  g. G# c$ d- [然後啲人睇睇下入去買咗!
- D; E- R0 h+ K既牟利又侵權!
, b$ c! E( Q2 ^但亦大行其道.....
3 ]; X1 O' N& d0 F/ A唉! 唔係話甘就唔代表bt係唔犯法定係點......$ h8 Y- R  Y" j' y/ z
只係香港政府係多重標準!
. ~+ c& J' W- T. R' O0 l同埋bt冇先例, 始終係灰色地帶!8 ^' V4 Q8 c3 h; ?8 \
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....., _; r# H! H1 r: T$ m$ A
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)* S7 }% x! P- X4 c2 d/ [/ o
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:
- R' o# U! F% Y大家可以睇o下有關法律條文. 裏面*好 ...
, A% u* N+ p$ I. `+ l4 hI agree you points that it could be illegal+ e/ P) W/ \7 }; H4 t; B9 @
but that is still a "gray area"4 }5 P" c# f1 T& A6 y3 p1 a
whoever win, it still makes us to feel that the result is unfair
2 N, F5 `- V+ @2 g$ Z! h0 K2 P  f5 W2 X. m( d+ u" O2 Z# S/ Q
anyway, I want to say that is
7 P# K( {% k' g2 @( h5 iwho is supposed to be protected by laws
/ u8 `* |3 ?, w- y* _1 screators?5 F  O" T* D* O" D, f
but I think now they just only protect big companies but not the movies market
, B4 E/ R2 B& Wlet's them copy others ideas and produce lots of boring movies (not all) to earn our money.7 \6 E+ b% \+ P- [5 Z
when we are cheated by some shops, we can sue those
1 m* w+ f9 O1 l* _$ H' {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:
5 R- o( p$ q6 y6 S其實我都唔肯定係咪真有其人=.=
  q' d; O1 G0 }. [7 |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:5 o! i4 P% e$ Q( t9 I4 S

$ i* d" j) F( p2 ~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!!
. q, J, D$ s2 G# w唔係喎!3 Q0 e) R  g# e6 t! s2 F
古惑天皇響--- 嗰度好出名係大佬黎喎!
% q  S$ O/ F) P% N我以前都成日去download佢放出黎啲戲!
  _! P& |) o! V. p8 D( ^4 {9 T( 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!+ j2 y5 e  }( d. _* X% ?
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 `8 W3 m! Y7 d7 Q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!!!1 |( v" B; G' O- [! W5 y
dun say nowadays movie is bad or not, downloan it is giving its face.......
5 X" h0 [' d3 S+ B' yif so bad, dun download la, right?/ C- d  x4 B$ c8 f, M8 M9 V
i am dun shouting on all using bt guys, because i am also this guy^^9 ?5 t. Z7 o7 o$ T9 }
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* T; ~" i& l0 r* z
no need $$$ and need $, how to consider also no need $ is much more benfit la! H2 G/ N: F7 |, V2 X: O- C5 h
so what i always think is that, in this modern and high tech society1 L: g/ G' ?  S1 t3 Z: l) E3 m
using bt or winmx this kind of high tech should be graduately to take over buying CD or going to cinema.........
' G6 _1 o& d& H4 k3 o! K) C8 vwhy not develop this to takeover now condition? even need $$$ 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 !!!+ |5 x! H: c6 ]2 u
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!# n4 M5 G, H7 n2 |; L
佢又唔係殺人放火~~~
! t* H& {; {( Z3 _7 H' ?) u政府想比下馬威0的人~~
/ y5 r' x. R7 z% b錢就一定罰. o2 L+ r+ r0 R, u
未必要坐牢~~
作者: HansChan    時間: 2005-4-30 01:31 PM

如果真係判佢有罪,: O" g: O: q$ M6 q0 M$ Z) o
唔知佢會唔會上訴呢?
$ @  h% t. c  V: t5 q3 K; P佢又失業既, 會唔會冇錢上訴呢?
5 n/ Y8 v+ I( L0 W: S% K& b8 Z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:
# ^& u4 F9 F6 d9 C3 K告得入我切!!!
; G) s$ F* a" m$ y( d- f
我當初都估告唔入,
- h# o. P$ E# z! q) r8 q不過我老豆提醒我,政府咁多大狀,& p1 t+ A7 H( @$ S( b$ D
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& q9 q+ w4 Q7 Y" 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:
# P# F0 v  H0 {& e7 ?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)
2 H* e. m$ e: V$ \( r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