There’s an interesting post on TorrentFreak that concerns so-called “pirate” subtitles for films. It’s absurd that anyone could consider subtitles to be piracy in any way. They are a good example of how ordinary people can add value by generously helping others enjoy films and TV programmes in languages they don’t understand. In no sense …
Subtitles also help those with hearing disabilities, so subtitling should be considered an essential service. I can’t tell you how many retail DVDs I bought in the past of old films that had no captioning or subtitles whatsoever. Every now and then I’ll grab a classic film torrent and the subtitles exist on SubScene that didn’t exist on the retail DVD I bought more than a decade ago.
Technically, a translation is a derivative work, so the copyright owner would have to authorize the translation for it to be legal. I don’t understand why people would be debating this on TorrentFreak. I thought people on there didn’t care, they just wanted to pirate stuff. edit: Wow, I’m sorry downvoters. I was just communicating what the law is. I did not say I agreed with it or that I think people shouldn’t add more subtitles to films if the language isn’t available. Talk about shooting the messenger! Haha! And I honestly did think that people who keep up with the news on TorrentFreak were mostly interested in pirating. If that’s not true that’s OK. I was just surprised people got into a debate about copyright law on a site where I thought its readership was mostly people who share copyrighted material.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
⚓ A community devoted to in-depth debate on topics concerning digital piracy, ethical problems, and legal advancements.
And how do I get an invite? Is anybody here a member?
to what website?
yes
Subtitles also help those with hearing disabilities, so subtitling should be considered an essential service. I can’t tell you how many retail DVDs I bought in the past of old films that had no captioning or subtitles whatsoever. Every now and then I’ll grab a classic film torrent and the subtitles exist on SubScene that didn’t exist on the retail DVD I bought more than a decade ago.
Technically, a translation is a derivative work, so the copyright owner would have to authorize the translation for it to be legal. I don’t understand why people would be debating this on TorrentFreak. I thought people on there didn’t care, they just wanted to pirate stuff. edit: Wow, I’m sorry downvoters. I was just communicating what the law is. I did not say I agreed with it or that I think people shouldn’t add more subtitles to films if the language isn’t available. Talk about shooting the messenger! Haha! And I honestly did think that people who keep up with the news on TorrentFreak were mostly interested in pirating. If that’s not true that’s OK. I was just surprised people got into a debate about copyright law on a site where I thought its readership was mostly people who share copyrighted material.
Its also a religious service that should be protected in the US by the constitution https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Missionary_Church_of_Kopimism
that’s stretching the term of “religion”