Originally posted by iceman24567
Dreaminganime
Thank you very much, sir.
The quality of that vid is quite good and it loads up fast.
They did, however, steal their work from Crunchyroll...which makes me kind of sad.
I wish Crunchyroll would make their HD streaming free and available to anyone...I do NOT mind one or two commercials in my video...as long as the video is high quality and worth watching.
Originally posted by menokokoro
i use narutoget.com
lol!
I visited there..but it wasn't up yet. Sucks to be me, I guess.
But that was like...two days ago?
However, I'll check there if dreaminganime doesn't have it. Dude, check out dreaminganime: it's stolen from crunchyroll and it's pretty good quality.
Originally posted by psycho gundam
http://www.megavideo.com/?v=XP065P66^ here
Megavideo is my last resort. I hate those bastards because they limit you to 55 minutes then you have to wait like 2 hours.
Bastards!
lol
So I use them as a last resort.
I don't like to do things illegally...so I like to download torrents that are created from the site that was directly responsible for the fansub...it's a legal gray area and it is disputable if it's illegal.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I don't like to do things illegally...so I like to download torrents that are created from the site that was directly responsible for the fansub...it's a legal gray area and it is disputable if it's illegal.
Uh, that's not really any more gray than downloading it from a completely unrelated site.
Originally posted by Q99
Uh, that's not really any more gray than downloading it from a completely unrelated site.
Meh, unless the unrelated site in question has the permission of the fansubbers to host the fansubbed ep, then it is slightly different.
At least we don't have to pay to view the fansubbed ep, as that'd be a complete violation on the fansubbers part. >__>
Originally posted by Demonic Phoenix
Meh, unless the unrelated site in question has the permission of the fansubbers to host the fansubbed ep, then it is slightly different.At least we don't have to pay to view the fansubbed ep, as that'd be a complete violation on the fansubbers part. >__>
It's slightly different, but not really in the legal sense, the fan subbing is in the same area whether they made it themselves or used someone else's.
Though yea, charging for it kicks it into another zone entirely ;P
Originally posted by Q99
It's slightly different, but not really in the legal sense, the fan subbing is in the same area whether they made it themselves or used someone else's.Though yea, charging for it kicks it into another zone entirely ;P
That's true. Fansubbing itself is illegal; well, at least the distribution of fansubbed material is.
Yep. Unfortunately, certain sites still charge for viewing and/or downloading fansubbed material. That's just wrong.
Originally posted by Q99
Uh, that's not really any more gray than downloading it from a completely unrelated site.
Legally, it is gray.
And, technically, you're streaming it from another site that LEGALLY bought the rights to subtitle the program and post it up on their site.
Then, another site came along and STOLE the LEGAL and LICENSED version of the show and posted it up on their site, making a profit.
What's the difference between that an a fansub?
A fansub acquires a "raw" copy of the show that aired live on TV. They then "clean" the raw by editing out commercials and other things, then they, with their own abilities, translate and subtitle what is said on screen, into a different language.
They then post a torrent of their work and people watch their work.
The reason it is a legal gray area is due to how much the original broadcast of the program was changed. It is considered artistic expression. They also don't sell their product...meaning, they don't and won't take money for their work: it all has to be voluntary. If they tried to sell it, it would cross, immediately, into illegal territory: it has to remain free.
That is NOT the same as to what I was referring to:
dreaminganime STOLE the video from crunchyroll. Crunchyroll COMPLETELY legally licensed the show and can advertise and make money off of it. They had translators, paid, translate for them. Then they posted it up with the subtitles. Basically, they do the same exact things the fansubbers except they do it for a profit...which means they had to pay for licensing of the show from Viz media. Posting up the work of a legal group is illegal and is copyright infringement.
Making "art' of copyrighted material, and NOT selling it, is not illegal: it is artistic expression. Why do you think Dattebayo is still around? Why do you think Taka is still around? As long as they don't try to profit from their work, they are safe in that legal gray area and can get out with the "artistic expression" claim.
Originally posted by Demonic Phoenix
That's true. Fansubbing itself is illegal; well, at least the distribution of fansubbed material is.Yep. Unfortunately, certain sites still charge for viewing and/or downloading fansubbed material. That's just wrong.
Fansubbing is illegal through certain interpretations of the law. Different interpretations of those same and different laws say it is legal, as well. This is why it's a gray area.
EDIT!
Fansubs have a understood rule: you sub only unlicensed shows. If the show becomes licensed in your country, you stop fansubbing it in your country's language. That's what happened to Naruto and that's what happened to Bleach. I now watch Bleach and Naruto on Crunchyroll or Hulu, which are legal licensed copies. That's why I didn't like dreaminganime's site because they STOLE the licensed copy. (doesn't mean I didn't watch it, though! hahahaha...dang, well..I admit, I won't do it again.)
Originally posted by dadudemon
Legally, it is gray.And, technically, you're streaming it from another site that LEGALLY bought the rights to subtitle the program and post it up on their site.
Then, another site came along and STOLE the LEGAL and LICENSED version of the show and posted it up on their site, making a profit.
I wasn't talking stolen sub (illegal) vs licensed sub (legal) there, I was speaking just about fansub (which is illegal) vs stolen fansub (which is exactly as illegal), since that seemed to be what was mentioned in the post I quoted.
A fansub acquires a "raw" copy of the show that aired live on TV. They then "clean" the raw by editing out commercials and other things, then they, with their own abilities, translate and subtitle what is said on screen, into a different language.They then post a torrent of their work and people watch their work.
The reason it is a legal gray area is due to how much the original broadcast of the program was changed. It is considered artistic expression. They also don't sell their product...meaning, they don't and won't take money for their work: it all has to be voluntary. If they tried to sell it, it would cross, immediately, into illegal territory: it has to remain free.
That's really not the case legally speaking, direct translations aren't going to get you under any artist expression laws in the least (an abridged series, sure, that gets into parody), and copyright law covers 'derived works' too, especially ones as superficially altered as that.
I mean, as long as it's free, many companies don't care, but cropping out commercials and translated it doesn't make it legal, let's not kid ourselves. The companies would be completely within their rights to shut any fansub site down, they just don't have much reason to so they let it go with a shrug.
Crunchyroll COMPLETELY legally licensed the show and can advertise and make money off of it. They had translators, paid, translate for them. Then they posted it up with the subtitles. Basically, they do the same exact things the fansubbers except they do it for a profit...which means they had to pay for licensing of the show from Viz media. Posting up the work of a legal group is illegal and is copyright infringement.
Yea, that's the only legal way to do it.
Making "art' of copyrighted material, and NOT selling it, is not illegal: it is artistic expression. Why do you think Dattebayo is still around? Why do you think Taka is still around? As long as they don't try to profit from their work, they are safe in that legal gray area and can get out with the "artistic expression" claim.
It really is a matter of the companies just not caring, but that's not the same as 'legal,' and it's definitely not protected 'art'.
Any interpretations of the law you've heard that says otherwise really is probably just something someone made up as a justification, but copyright law is more clear than that. There's not a lot of fuzziness on this question.
There's some ethical grayness, i.e. "Is it ok to break the law on copying stuff if even the creators don't care/there's no way for people here to get it legally?", but that ethical grayness doesn't extend into the legal realm.
Fansubs have a understood rule: you sub only unlicensed shows. If the show becomes licensed in your country, you stop fansubbing it in your country's language.
Quite. Which is both a matter of courtesy to the companies to help encourage them to continue to not care, and just sensible policy.
Originally posted by Q99
I wasn't talking stolen sub (illegal) vs licensed sub (legal) there, I was speaking just about fansub (which is illegal) vs stolen fansub (which is exactly as illegal), since that seemed to be what was mentioned in the post I quoted.That's really not the case legally speaking, direct translations aren't going to get you under any artist expression laws in the least (an abridged series, sure, that gets into parody), and copyright law covers 'derived works' too, especially ones as superficially altered as that.
I mean, as long as it's free, many companies don't care, but cropping out commercials and translated it doesn't make it legal, let's not kid ourselves. The companies would be completely within their rights to shut any fansub site down, they just don't have much reason to so they let it go with a shrug.
If it were expressly illegal, then why haven't any cases been won against fansubbers that followed the "rules"? (No cases have been brought up against ones that follow the "rules", btw...so that's kind of a trick question.)
I've already given you the answer in another post.
It is not illegal and it is illegal.
Also, derived works are covered...but how to enforce it? More on that, later.
Originally posted by Q99
Yea, that's the only legal way to do it.
The only completely legal way to do it, yes.
You're thinking of laws being strictly Boolean: true or not true. That's not how law is, though. There are legal gray areas, loopholes, legal misinterpretation (in the case of ambiguity) and elasticity.
Originally posted by Q99
It really is a matter of the companies just not caring, but that's not the same as 'legal,' and it's definitely not protected 'art'.
To the first part, now you're getting it.
To the second part, it is protected art/education under fair use...which can only be argued, in the case of anime, if the episode is not licensed. The work, which only includes original work of editing and subtitles, is illegal if that episode is licensed. There is a difference between the thing the Crunchyroll does or, say, ADV does: ADV licenses the ability to distribute, commercially, a translated package with American voice acting, etc. They can change the product in many ways including censoring the material (which they have been known to do). The original, copyrighted, material, that aired on TV, in Japan, however, is not the item licensed. This is what Crunchyroll is licensing, which has a provision in it to allow the removal of most commercial injection into the "product."
Straight up, down right, is it illegal? Yes. Can fansubbers get away with it if a case was brought up? Yes, but it would be hard to accomplish unless what they are distributing is not already licensed to for distribution. In other words, it is a gray area if gone about the proper way.
How can you bring up a copyright case and prove financial damages for a product that is not even licensed in the area? You can't. It's an uphill battle. You'd waste money on the lawsuit costs by have to prove that it cut into profits for your group. This is also why fansubbers have an "spoken" rules about halting fansubbing once the product becomes licensed: it prevents them from getting stuck in the hole of punitive damages.
Of course, I'm only speaking from a US perspective.
Only the distributes would be doing the illegal actions, not the people watching it. This is why one should leech if they are downloading something illegal: don't distribute it!
Anyway, back on track: if the fansubber sells the product or advertises on the product or where the product is distributed, they could lose a leg to stand on. You would have to legally make an agreement before you can profit from others' work.
Originally posted by Q99
Any interpretations of the law you've heard that says otherwise really is probably just something someone made up as a justification, but copyright law is more clear than that. There's not a lot of fuzziness on this question.There's some ethical grayness, i.e. "Is it ok to break the law on copying stuff if even the creators don't care/there's no way for people here to get it legally?", but that ethical grayness doesn't extend into the legal realm.
Actually, I've studied this in great detail. This is not some back-room "buddy-information". There are very real ways to avoid legal trouble, when fansubbing.
It's not so much that they copyright holders don't care, there's just not a viable and economically feasible way to pursue fansubbers that follow the fansubbing rules. If they don't cut into the profits, at all, of the original works, they'd have a hard time proving any sort of punitive damages, much less getting a US judge to award it.
Illegal? Sure, in the strictest of interpretations. Is it a legal gray area? Mos def.
I think this is more of a difference of what "legal gray area" means. Legal gray area means that what is being done is technically illegal, but there are provisions, interpretations, or problems that make the prosecution or pursuit of the illegality, unfruitful or it lacks the ability to actually go through trial. Another way to interpret a legal gray area: something is illegal but there are no penalties or ways to enforce penalties, legally. Nothing happens.
It's not so much that they copyright holders don't care, there's just not a viable and economically feasible way to pursue fansubbers that follow the fansubbing rules. If they don't cut into the profits, at all, of the original works, they'd have a hard time proving any sort of punitive damages, much less getting a US judge to award it.Illegal? Sure, in the strictest of interpretations. Is it a legal gray area? Mos def.
"Not cost effective to pursue legally" is a lot different than "legally gray" is what I'm saying.
It doesn't make it a legally gray just because it's not cost effective, it's not like the law's fuzzy on the subject, it's merely the economics/lack of reason for doing so that makes it safe. The laws are the same even if there's really no way to get damages out of it.
Originally posted by Q99
"Not cost effective to pursue legally" is a lot different than "legally gray" is what I'm saying.It doesn't make it a legally gray just because it's not cost effective, it's not like the law's fuzzy on the subject, it's merely the economics/lack of reason for doing so that makes it safe. The laws are the same even if there's really no way to get damages out of it.
I think there's a misunderstanding between us of legally gray, then.
Legally gray means it's illegal, plain and simple. But it also means that it's not pursuable, legally, or it conflicts with other laws.
In this context, it is not economically feasible to pursue the "within the rules" fansubbers and there are other interpretations under fair use and "artistic expression" that can justify a legal use. In other words, it fits both directions of "legally gray": not pursuable (because it is not economically feasible), and it can be "white-washed", legally, with some interpretations of the law (don't get me wrong, it can only justify certain portions of copyright laws, but not completely).
It will remain a legal gray area until copyright laws are changed in the US to be more specific AND enforcing those laws nets a legitimate penalty. Unfortunately or fortunately, amending copyright laws could make it better or worse for other types of sharing such as movie or music. It could cause for more explicit penalties that exceed current standards...or it could put a cap on the penalties.
Regardless, fansubbers that stick the fansubbing rules, have no worry, at the moment, of a legal back-lash due to the grayness of fansubbing a product in an unlicensed market.
In my mind, it seems legal-enough to fansub unlicensed products.
Spoiler:
Kushina is Konoha’s first successful experimental host project.Konoha decided to use the 1st Hokage’s genes and implant them into children in the hopes that it would yield fascinating results.
One of the head scientists behind the project was none other than Orochimaru.
~ Dunno if these are true or not, but according to Ohana, they are confirmed.
If true, then this confirms the theory that Naruto is a Senju.