Downloading anime illegal?

[Nyuri]

Hello,

until now I have always watched animes via stream or boight the dvd/br version.
I just found this forum and the animes linked here from different filehosters seem to have pretty good quality.
Since I cant get every anime I like on physical media I thought about maybe starting to download some series.
I downloaded a song here and there in the past but no movies or animes.

Is it also illegal to download animes who are not yet licensed in Europe? Or just to download licensed anime?
I know the risk is also there but how realistic is it to get caught and what can happen in worst case ?
( Also should I use a proxy or any other type of security measure )

Sorry for these kinda dumb questions.

 

[KuroiHana]

Even though there have been announcements to fight piracy of japanese media on western sites like AS by the japanese government the chance of being caught as a leecher is almost 0. Persecuting westerners downloading anime or music which isn't even availiable in their country is simply not worth the money and effort for japanese companies which usually just produce media for the japanese market anyway with no plans to release it on the western market. If the japanese government or a large company decides fighting foreign piracy on a large scale they would probably take measures against the sites or uploaders uploading TBs worth of content and not against the downloaders.

The chances to get caught might be higher if you download rips from western streaming sites like crunchyroll but I'm not familiar with their policies tbh.

TL;DR: it's not legal but the chances to get caught as a downloader are really low

 

[pumasrevenge]

I would say this depends on the region you live in.

I'm living in Austria for example and our copyright law is really "old". To make it short, for us just the upload of a copyrighted file is illegal, nothing else.
The most important paragraph in our copyright law is the fact that private copies are allowed. And yes, it doesn't matter if you get it from a friend or from the internet, a private copy is a private copy (and yes, a stream is also private copy). Even judges and lawyers say that each and every time if some discussion about the copyright law comes up in Austria. And this is also the reason why there was never ever someone arrested because of downloading files.

You're just guilty if you upload a file (which is a big problem with torrents) or you give someone a copy of the copyrighted material, in which case it wouldn't be a private copy anymore since it's a reproduction. If we are extremely strict however, if you bought a CD normally you're not allowed to play it while some of your friends/family is present, since the license you bought is just for your own needs and everything beyond that would also be reproduction.
In Austria just "big" uploaders are prosecuted and yet all afaik all of the ones who were prosecuted were uploader of movies from western film studios.

Anyway, copyright law is a hard topic to talk about. According to my sentence above nearly everyone would be guilty of an offence in Austria but you can't prosecute all people, which is the reason why I'm saying our copyright law is "old". But yeah, I'm happy about that fact, hehe.

 

[wehasband]

So its like most of the areas in life, neither white nor black, but shifting shades of grey when it comes to legality. Laws, after all, go only as far as the places where they are enforced.

 

[Ignis]

well, in all law-abiding honesty, downloading anything not CreativeCommons or widely-known announced as "free" is illegal.

Not true. Blanket claims like this are very dangerous. I'll give a popular example: the novel 1984 by George Orwell is already public domain (i.e. you can legally download it free of charge) in some countries but not others. Then there's the fact that Creative Commons licences aren't the only ones of its kind. GNU/Linux operating systems are licensed under GPL (General Public Licence) and they're still legally free of charge to download. But that doesn't mean stuff under GPL has to be free of charge.

Also, this may be getting too much into the nitpicking territory, but simply downloading isn't by itself illegal. Let's say I purchase a game through Steam. The game is copyrighted and not free of charge. Will I break the law if I download the game I've purchased to my PC off Steam's servers? (For that matter, something to think about: if I've purchased a game because I want to support the developers, but I don't like using Steam for my games, why should I be guilty for getting the game from a torrent, for example?)

Persecuting westerners downloading anime or music which isn't even availiable in their country is simply not worth the money and effort

Persecuting is free. Anyone can do it. Prosecuting is what costs money. :P

 

[loveru]

As far as I know, in the USA, it is not illegal to download media that has not been licensed in the USA.

if I've purchased a game because I want to support the developers, but I don't like using Steam for my games, why should I be guilty for getting the game from a torrent, for example?

But this is illegal. It's illegal because, by using bit torrent, you are sharing the file with many other people who have not paid for it. If everyone who used the torrent had already paid, then I wouldn't see any ethical problem with it. But all that said, I still torrent stuff all the time. So I'm not trying to claim any moral high ground here.

 

[Ignis]

It's illegal because, by using bit torrent, you are sharing the file with many other people who have not paid for it.

So you're saying that 1) the distribution method makes it illegal and 2) it's illegal because it involves people who haven't paid for the content. From point 1, would you say that if the distribution method didn't involve resharing the file in question to other peer―let's say through a file-hosting service―it would be legal? From point 2, would you say that if all the people involved in a torrent swarm had already paid for the file being distributed then it would be legal?

If everyone who used the torrent had already paid, then I wouldn't see any ethical problem with it.

So is it a legal or ethical problem if a torrent swarm contains people who haven't already paid for the file being distributed?

 

[loveru]

So you're saying that 1) the distribution method makes it illegal and 2) it's illegal because it involves people who haven't paid for the content. From point 1, would you say that if the distribution method didn't involve resharing the file in question to other peer―let's say through a file-hosting service―it would be legal? From point 2, would you say that if all the people involved in a torrent swarm had already paid for the file being distributed then it would be legal?

Sharing a copyrighted file through a file-hosting service is illegal and unethical. But it's not quite as unethical as torrenting, since you'll probably be sharing it with much fewer people. Torrenting is particularly unethical, since the file that you aid people in downloading may be seeded by others for a long time after you stop seeding. This creates a chain that could reach countless thousands with a popular movie torrent from the pirate bay. Simply torrenting something has far reaching effects.

Torrent servers that are not maintained or created by the copyright holder are probably going to be illegal, regardless if everyone in it has purchased the game.

So is it a legal or ethical problem if a torrent swarm contains people who haven't already paid for the file being distributed?

It is both unethical and illegal to share files with people who have not paid for them. But I see nothing ethically wrong with torrenting something that everyone in the torrent swarm has already paid for. The same for sharing a file on a file-sharing service with people who have already paid. There is no moral gray area in that, as far as I can tell. However, it may still be illegal.

Let me say again, I often torrent things myself. But I'd rather pay for things. I probably will in the future, but I can't afford it now. I'm in college now.

Is it clear now? Do you think I'm incorrect in my thoughts on it? Do you feel differently about it?