Talk:Chicken Hawk: Men Who Love Boys (film documentary on BoyLovers by Adi Sideman, 1994)

Could this page be incorporated into this entry? Chicken Hawk: Men Who Love Boys (film)

Also, I am not sure if the "Download the .torrent file" is not a copyright violation... best to be sure that the author has made it freely available no? --Etenne (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

The interpretation of copyright law varies by jurisdiction. Many jurisdictions allow the downloading of copyrighted material if for personal use only, and not for profit (for reselling of the material). (If you want the references for that, I can dig them up for you -- but it is a big hassle...) User4 (talk) 01:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I have now added a note to that effect in the article. User4 (talk) 02:01, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

No, I feel this is a violation of both BoyWiki and Free Spirits policy. Please be careful not to link to down loads of illegal or copyrighted material. --Etenne (talk) 03:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. You "feel" it is a violation of both BoyWiki and Free Spirits policy to include links, though I can demonstrate that your "feeling" is incorrect. I believe you should check to confirm that your "feeling" is correct (which it is not, unless something has changed that I am unaware of). You also could benefit from the study of international copyright law and interpretation.

I "feel" (and I can back up my "feeling" with facts) that the edit should be reverted, but I am not going to do so.

Would you like some links to international copyright laws?

User4 (talk) 03:51, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

BTW - are you aware that the absolutely worst thing that could happen -- if links to objectionable materials are included (we are not talking about illegal KP - that is a big problem) -- is that you would get an e-mail saying, "Remove those links, or else!" If you then remove the links, the "problem" is over. That's it. You get an e-mail, then remove the links. Until you get an e-mail like that, you have no problems!. Really. What I am saying is true! That is how the new laws work - you must be given the chance to remove the objectionable links first. And if you do remove them, then the whole thing is over. That's it. Nothing more. Finis. You and BW are then free and clear. But, actually, you will never even get such an e-mail (except from a hack lawyer who doesn't know the law,) because links are not the same thing as actually reproducing copyrighted material. The onus is on the one who reproduces the materials, NOT on the one who simply links to the materials. That is the law, too. User4 (talk) 12:49, 2 March 2015 (UTC)