@kaia Joke answer: Bleach Serious answer: Full Metal Alchemist: Brotherhood (FMA non-Brotherhood being a bit different) "It's a terrible day for rain" being quoted so often it's basically a meme
@kaia Also I'd recommend watching Full Metal Alchemist: Brotherhood, even if you're not really into animes as it's pretty mainstream and definitely deserves classic status.
@mangeurdenuage If torrenting is against the law: - A bunch of game launchers would be illegal (some launchers use BitTorrent for distributing game files). - A bunch of sync tools would be illegal (Resilio Sync uses BitTorrent for synchronization) - COINS (British government's treasury stuff) would be illegal. - Facebook and Twitter would be illegal (altho... I wouldn't complain about that one). - Some Uni's would be committing cybercrime (they use BitTorrent for distributing datasets).
@david Oh yea, piracy is something else completely. Torrenting is just a means to achieve a goal ("piracy" in this case). The media used doesn't matter too much, it's the goal that gets you in trouble (depending on how strict laws and its enforcement are)
Torrenting often rather consists of sharing useful information with your neighbors and in certain cases it is merely unauthorized copying, although in many cases seeding constitutes prohibited copying.
@sally I believe Trisquel goes with options b and c under section 3; b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or, c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
(The offer is written in text and the medium is bittorrent).
Of course, nobody bothers to take that, as they just download the offered sources.
The GPLv2 is indeed a problem for torrenting software with many different versions that aren't trivial to accompany with a written offer, unlike a whole OS image that has everything required to display the offer.
To be entirely honest, even if you technically end up infringing a free license while distributing free software for purposes of freedom, as long as people can actually get the version of source code that they want, all sane copyright holders are going to give an exception for that case if required.
Torrenting technically does break the terms GPLv2 (source code disclosure), so you technically infringe copyright for a lot of free software included in GNU distributions thanks to stupid devs that refuse to upgrade to v3, which does include a written an exception for torrenting.
@finlaydag33k Just because it is popular to use certain words in error doesn't make such incorrect usage correct.
Distributing and selling are acts that are legally restricted, while making a copy or merely using some software does not require permission unlike what many proprietary companies claim.
@finlaydag33k >There is this thing called "colloquially"... Yes, people use words wrong colloquially. >Or are you the kind of person that goes around Yes, every time I hear someone use piracy incorrectly, I advise them what piracy means and that they likely mean unauthorized or prohibited copying.
>Making a copy may require permission In the jurisdictions I have investigated this, the copyright act explicitly authorizes making backup copy of the software for personal use without needing to ask permission. >Usage of software, is quite literally the same in that regard. In the jurisdictions I have investigated this, the copyright act explicitly authorizes running authorized copies of software, even if such act of running is unauthorized.
>It's usage may require permission (generally, this means obtaining a license). You are confusing copyright and contract law.
A license is only required to redistribute software, although many proprietary software companies love writing malicious features to make software refuse to run without acceptance of an unfair contract (a "EULA").
>Just because you can get your hands on software, doesn't mean you're allowed to use it. If you have a legally produced copy of software, you are allowed to run it, although a lot of proprietary software may have malicious features that makes the software refuse to run unless a fraudulent monthly rent has been paid.
@Suiseiseki There is this thing called "colloquially"... Using "piracy" for this definition isn't "in error" nor "incorrect usage". Or are you the kind of person that goes around "Well akshually it's not called piracy it's copyright infringement of software" every time someone calls it "piracy"?
Making a copy may require permission (although this is _generally_ granted by either the license or the law), depending on circumstances.
Usage of software, is quite literally the same in that regard. It's usage may require permission (generally, this means obtaining a license). Just because you can get your hands on software, doesn't mean you're allowed to use it.