Divyanshu67/squad_v2 huggingface dataset:
Korean_War

After a new wave of UN sanctions, on 11 March 2013, North Korea claimed that it had invalidated the 1953 armistice. On 13 March 2013, North Korea confirmed it ended the 1953 Armistice and declared North Korea "is not restrained by the North-South declaration on non-aggression". On 30 March 2013, North Korea stated that it had entered a "state of war" with South Korea and declared that "The long-standing situation of the Korean peninsula being neither at peace nor at war is finally over". Speaking on 4 April 2013, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel, informed the press that Pyongyang had "formally informed" the Pentagon that it had "ratified" the potential usage of a nuclear weapon against South Korea, Japan and the United States of America, including Guam and Hawaii. Hagel also stated that the United States would deploy the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense anti-ballistic missile system to Guam, because of a credible and realistic nuclear threat from North Korea.

Question: Why is North Korea insisting that the 1953 armistice was violated?
Answer: new wave of UN sanctions

Question: When did North Korea call an end to the armistice?
Answer: 13 March 2013

Question: In 2013, who what country did North Korea declare war on?
Answer: South Korea

Question: What weapon does North Korea claim it now has the ability to use?
Answer: a nuclear weapon

Question: How does the United States view North Korea's threats? 
Answer: credible and realistic nuclear threat
Korean_War

The initial assault by North Korean KPA forces were aided by the use of Soviet T-34-85 tanks. A North Korean tank corps equipped with about 120 T-34s spearheaded the invasion. These drove against a ROK Army with few anti-tank weapons adequate to deal with the Soviet T-34s. Additional Soviet armor was added as the offensive progressed. The North Korean tanks had a good deal of early successes against South Korean infantry, elements of the 24th Infantry Division, and those United States built M24 Chaffee light tanks that they encountered. Interdiction by ground attack aircraft was the only means of slowing the advancing Korean armor. The tide turned in favour of the United Nations forces in August 1950 when the North Koreans suffered major tank losses during a series of battles in which the UN forces brought heavier equipment to bear, including M4A3 Sherman medium tanks backed by U.S. M26 heavy tanks, along with the British Centurion, Churchill, and Cromwell tanks.

Question: What form of attack was an effective measure of slowing Korean armor?
Answer: ground attack aircraft

Question: What weapon did the the KPA use that was successful early in the Korean conflict?
Answer: Soviet T-34-85 tanks

Question: What helped the UN forces and shifted the war in their favor?
Answer: the North Koreans suffered major tank losses

Question: What actions of the UN also helped them improve their results during the war?
Answer: the UN forces brought heavier equipment

Question: How many tanks were in the North Korean tank corps?
Answer: 120
Korean_War

Because neither Korea had a significant navy, the Korean War featured few naval battles. A skirmish between North Korea and the UN Command occurred on 2 July 1950; the U.S. Navy cruiser USS Juneau, the Royal Navy cruiser HMS Jamaica, and the frigate HMS Black Swan fought four North Korean torpedo boats and two mortar gunboats, and sank them. USS Juneau later sank several ammunition ships that had been present. The last sea battle of the Korean War occurred at Inchon, days before the Battle of Incheon; the ROK ship PC-703 sank a North Korean mine layer in the Battle of Haeju Island, near Inchon. Three other supply ships were sunk by PC-703 two days later in the Yellow Sea. Thereafter, vessels from the UN nations held undisputed control of the sea about Korea. The gun ships were used in shore bombardment, while the aircraft carriers provided air support to the ground forces.

Question: Why were naval skirmishes not really seen in the Korean War?
Answer: neither Korea had a significant navy

Question: Who pretty much gained and maintained control of the sea?
Answer: the UN nations

Question: Who dominated any battles that may have taken place at sea?
Answer: the UN Command

Question: Where was the last sea battle of the Korean War?
Answer: Inchon
Korean_War

During most of the war, the UN navies patrolled the west and east coasts of North Korea, sinking supply and ammunition ships and denying the North Koreans the ability to resupply from the sea. Aside from very occasional gunfire from North Korean shore batteries, the main threat to United States and UN navy ships was from magnetic mines. During the war, five U.S. Navy ships were lost to mines: two minesweepers, two minesweeper escorts, and one ocean tug. Mines and gunfire from North Korean coastal artillery damaged another 87 U.S. warships, resulting in slight to moderate damage.

Question: What type of ships did the US spend most of its time sinking?
Answer: supply and ammunition ships

Question: What weapon posed a significant threat to US navy ships?
Answer: magnetic mines

Question: How many US warships were damaged by gun fire and mines?
Answer: 87

Question: Where were the majority of US naval patrols of Korea?
Answer: the west and east coasts of North Korea
Korean_War

The Chinese intervention in late October 1950 bolstered the Korean People's Air Force (KPAF) of North Korea with the MiG-15, one of the world's most advanced jet fighters. The fast, heavily armed MiG outflew first-generation UN jets such as the F-80 (United States Air Force) and Gloster Meteors (Royal Australian Air Force), posing a real threat to B-29 Superfortress bombers even under fighter escort. Fearful of confronting the United States directly, the Soviet Union denied involvement of their personnel in anything other than an advisory role, but air combat quickly resulted in Soviet pilots dropping their code signals and speaking over the wireless in Russian. This known direct Soviet participation was a casus belli that the UN Command deliberately overlooked, lest the war for the Korean peninsula expand to include the Soviet Union, and potentially escalate into atomic warfare.

Question: Who denied having anything more than an advisory role in the Korean War?
Answer: the Soviet Union

Question: Who ignored the direct participation of the Soviet Union to prevent expanding the Korean War to the Soviet Union?
Answer: UN Command

Question: What may have occurred if the war was expanded to the Soviet Union?
Answer: atomic warfare

Question: What did the Soviet pilots start doing when accused of playing an integral role in the Korean War?
Answer: dropping their code signals and speaking over the wireless in Russian

Question: Who feared engaging in direct conflict with the United States?
Answer: Soviet Union
Korean_War

The USAF countered the MiG-15 by sending over three squadrons of its most capable fighter, the F-86 Sabre. These arrived in December 1950. The MiG was designed as a bomber interceptor. It had a very high service ceiling—50,000 feet (15,000 m) and carried very heavy weaponry: one 37 mm cannon and two 23 mm cannons. They were fast enough to dive past the fighter escort of P-80 Shooting Stars and F9F Panthers and could reach and destroy the U.S. heavy bombers. B-29 losses could not be avoided, and the Air Force was forced to switch from a daylight bombing campaign to the necessarily less accurate nighttime bombing of targets. The MiGs were countered by the F-86 Sabres. They had a ceiling of 42,000 feet (13,000 m) and were armed with six .50 caliber (12.7 mm) machine guns, which were range adjusted by radar gunsights. If coming in at higher altitude the advantage of engaging or not went to the MiG. Once in a level flight dogfight, both swept-wing designs attained comparable maximum speeds of around 660 mph (1,100 km/h). The MiG climbed faster, but the Sabre turned and dived better.

Question: What plane did the US send to Korea to counter the power of the MiG-15?
Answer: F-86 Sabre

Question: To mitigate the loses of the B-29, what did the US Air Force do?
Answer: switch from a daylight bombing campaign to the necessarily less accurate nighttime bombing

Question: What was the MiG designed to be?
Answer: bomber interceptor
Copyright_infringement

Copyright infringement is the use of works protected by copyright law without permission, infringing certain exclusive rights granted to the copyright holder, such as the right to reproduce, distribute, display or perform the protected work, or to make derivative works. The copyright holder is typically the work's creator, or a publisher or other business to whom copyright has been assigned. Copyright holders routinely invoke legal and technological measures to prevent and penalize copyright infringement.

Question: What are the rights of a content creator that has their work protected?
Answer: right to reproduce, distribute, display or perform the protected work, or to make derivative works

Question: How do creators of content protect their work from infringement?
Answer: copyright law

Question: Who is protected by copyright laws?
Answer: work's creator

Question: What is it called when someone uploads a video to YouTube without the creators permission?
Answer: copyright infringement

Question: You wrote a song that was based on an original work, what is this called?
Answer: derivative works

Question: How do creators of content not protect their work from infringement?

Question: What are the rights of a content creator that has their work unprotected?

Question: Who is unprotected by copyright laws?

Question: You wrote a song that was based on an unoriginal work, what is this called?

Question: What is it called when someone uploads a video to YouTube with the creators permission?
Copyright_infringement

Copyright infringement disputes are usually resolved through direct negotiation, a notice and take down process, or litigation in civil court. Egregious or large-scale commercial infringement, especially when it involves counterfeiting, is sometimes prosecuted via the criminal justice system. Shifting public expectations, advances in digital technology, and the increasing reach of the Internet have led to such widespread, anonymous infringement that copyright-dependent industries now focus less on pursuing individuals who seek and share copyright-protected content online, and more on expanding copyright law to recognize and penalize – as "indirect" infringers – the service providers and software distributors which are said to facilitate and encourage individual acts of infringement by others.

Question: How are disputes resolved for small scale infringement?
Answer: direct negotiation, a notice and take down process, or litigation in civil court

Question: Why has copyright infringement increased recently?
Answer: Shifting public expectations, advances in digital technology, and the increasing reach of the Internet

Question: What are two examples of groups that allow you to make copies of protected works?
Answer: service providers and software distributors

Question: What are content creation industries focusing on doing to prevent infringement?
Answer: expanding copyright law

Question: What can happen to people who commit copyright infringement on a mass-scale?
Answer: prosecuted via the criminal justice system

Question: What are two examples of groups that allow you to obtain copies of protected works?
Answer: service providers and software distributors

Question: How are disputes unresolved for small scale infringement?

Question: Why has copyright infringement decreased recently?

Question: What are content creation industries focusing on doing to aid infringement?

Question: What can't happen to people who commit copyright infringement on a mass-scale?

Question: What are two examples of groups that disallow you to make copies of protected works?
Copyright_infringement

The terms piracy and theft are often associated with copyright infringement. The original meaning of piracy is "robbery or illegal violence at sea", but the term has been in use for centuries as a synonym for acts of copyright infringement. Theft, meanwhile, emphasizes the potential commercial harm of infringement to copyright holders. However, copyright is a type of intellectual property, an area of law distinct from that which covers robbery or theft, offenses related only to tangible property. Not all copyright infringement results in commercial loss, and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1985 that infringement does not easily equate with theft.

Question: What terms are often linked to people who illegally use or distribute content that is not their own?
Answer: piracy and theft

Question: What means the same as robbery or illegal violence at sea?
Answer: piracy

Question: What kind of property is copyright used for?
Answer: intellectual property

Question: What is the difference between robbery and piracy?
Answer: related only to tangible property

Question: In the 1980's, the Supreme Court ruled that infringement does not equal what?
Answer: theft

Question: What terms are often linked to people who legally use or distribute content that is not their own?

Question: What doesn't mean the same as robbery or illegal violence at sea?

Question: What kind of property is copyright not used for?

Question: What is the same about robbery and piracy?

Question: In the 1980's, the Supreme Court ruled that infringement equals what?
Copyright_infringement

The practice of labelling the infringement of exclusive rights in creative works as "piracy" predates statutory copyright law. Prior to the Statute of Anne in 1710, the Stationers' Company of London in 1557, received a Royal Charter giving the company a monopoly on publication and tasking it with enforcing the charter. Those who violated the charter were labelled pirates as early as 1603. The term "piracy" has been used to refer to the unauthorized copying, distribution and selling of works in copyright. Article 12 of the 1886 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works uses the term "piracy" in relation to copyright infringement, stating "Pirated works may be seized on importation into those countries of the Union where the original work enjoys legal protection." Article 61 of the 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) requires criminal procedures and penalties in cases of "willful trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale." Piracy traditionally refers to acts of copyright infringement intentionally committed for financial gain, though more recently, copyright holders have described online copyright infringement, particularly in relation to peer-to-peer file sharing networks, as "piracy."

Question: What did the Royal Charter give to the Stationers' Company of London?
Answer: monopoly on publication and tasking it with enforcing the charter

Question: How does Article 12 of the 1886 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works use the term piracy?
Answer: in relation to copyright infringement

Question: What would happen if you imported a copyrighted work into a country where the original is protected by copyright law?
Answer: seized on importation

Question: When was the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights enacted?
Answer: 1994

Question: Piracy has been more recently described online in relation to what?
Answer: peer-to-peer file sharing networks

Question: What did the Royal Charter not give to the Stationers' Company of London?

Question: How does Article 21 of the 1886 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works use the term piracy?

Question: What would happen if you imported a copyrighted work into a country where the original isn't protected by copyright law?

Question: When was the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights repealed?

Question: Piracy has been less recently described online in relation to what?
Copyright_infringement

Copyright holders frequently refer to copyright infringement as theft. In copyright law, infringement does not refer to theft of physical objects that take away the owner's possession, but an instance where a person exercises one of the exclusive rights of the copyright holder without authorization. Courts have distinguished between copyright infringement and theft. For instance, the United States Supreme Court held in Dowling v. United States (1985) that bootleg phonorecords did not constitute stolen property. Instead, "interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The Copyright Act even employs a separate term of art to define one who misappropriates a copyright: '[...] an infringer of the copyright.'" The court said that in the case of copyright infringement, the province guaranteed to the copyright holder by copyright law – certain exclusive rights – is invaded, but no control, physical or otherwise, is taken over the copyright, nor is the copyright holder wholly deprived of using the copyrighted work or exercising the exclusive rights held.

Question: When you are accused theft as it relates to copyright law, you are exercising exclusive rights without what?
Answer: authorization

Question: What have courts said there is a difference between?
Answer: copyright infringement and theft

Question: In Dowling v. United States, what did bootleg records NOT constitute?
Answer: theft, conversion, or fraud

Question: What is the separate term of art to define misappropriation of copyright?
Answer: The Copyright Act

Question: What did the court say was invaded?
Answer: certain exclusive rights

Question: When you are accused theft as it relates to copyright law, you are exercising exclusive rights with what?

Question: What haven't courts said there is a difference between?

Question: In Dowling v. United States, what did bootleg records constitute?

Question: What is the separate term of art to define appropriation of copyright?

Question: What did the court say was evaded?
Copyright_infringement

Sometimes only partial compliance with license agreements is the cause. For example, in 2013, the US Army settled a lawsuit with Texas-based company Apptricity, which makes software that allows the army to track their soldiers in real time. In 2004, the US Army paid US$4.5 million for a license of 500 users, while allegedly installing the software for more than 9000 users; the case was settled for US$50 million. Major anti-piracy organizations, like the BSA, conduct software licensing audits regularly to ensure full compliance.

Question: What is a possible cause of copyright infringement?
Answer: partial compliance

Question: Who did Texas software company Apptricity write software for?
Answer: US Army

Question: How many users were paid for in 2004?
Answer: 500 users

Question: How much was the lawsuit settled for?
Answer: US$50 million

Question: Who is an example of a major anti-piracy organization?
Answer: the BSA

Question: What is an impossible cause of copyright infringement?

Question: Who did Texas software company Apptricity write hardware for?

Question: How many users weren't paid for in 2004?

Question: How much was the lawsuit rejected for?

Question: Who is an example of a minor anti-piracy organization?
Copyright_infringement

Cara Cusumano, director of the Tribeca Film Festival, stated in April 2014: "Piracy is less about people not wanting to pay and more about just wanting the immediacy – people saying, 'I want to watch Spiderman right now' and downloading it". The statement occurred during the third year that the festival used the Internet to present its content, while it was the first year that it featured a showcase of content producers who work exclusively online. Cusumano further explained that downloading behavior is not merely conducted by people who merely want to obtain content for free:

Question: What did Cara Cusumano say about piracy in 2014 that people want?
Answer: immediacy

Question: What had the festival done for the past three years when the statement by Cara Cusumano was made?
Answer: used the Internet to present its content

Question: It was the first year of Tribeca featuring a showcase of producers who do what?
Answer: work exclusively online

Question: What behavior is not just done by people who want content for free?
Answer: downloading

Question: What did Cara Cusumano say about piracy in 2013 that people want?

Question: What did Cara Cusumano say about piracy in 2014 that people don't want?

Question: What had the festival not done for the past three years when the statement by Cara Cusumano was made?

Question: It was the last year of Tribeca featuring a showcase of producers who do what?

Question: What behavior is just done by people who want content for free?
Copyright_infringement

In response to Cusumano's perspective, Screen Producers Australia executive director Matt Deaner clarified the motivation of the film industry: "Distributors are usually wanting to encourage cinema-going as part of this process [monetizing through returns] and restrict the immediate access to online so as to encourage the maximum number of people to go to the cinema." Deaner further explained the matter in terms of the Australian film industry, stating: "there are currently restrictions on quantities of tax support that a film can receive unless the film has a traditional cinema release."

Question: Who made clear the motivations of the filmmakers?
Answer: Matt Deaner

Question: Who encourages watching movies at a theater as making money from the film?
Answer: Distributors

Question: What is restricted to ensure the largest number of people see a movie at the theater?
Answer: immediate access to online

Question: What is restricted unless the film has a traditional theater release?
Answer: tax support that a film can receive

Question: Who made unclear the motivations of the filmmakers?

Question: Who discourages watching movies at a theater as making money from the film?

Question: What is restricted to ensure the smallest number of people see a movie at the theater?

Question: What is restricted to ensure the largest number of people see a movie at home?

Question: What is unrestricted unless the film has a traditional theater release?
Copyright_infringement

In a study published in the Journal of Behavioural and Experimental Economics, and reported on in early May 2014, researchers from the University of Portsmouth in the UK discussed findings from examining the illegal downloading behavior of 6,000 Finnish people, aged seven to 84. The list of reasons for downloading given by the study respondents included money saving; the ability to access material not on general release, or before it was released; and assisting artists to avoid involvement with record companies and movie studios.

Question: What researchers conducted a study in the early part of May 2014?
Answer: University of Portsmouth

Question: How many people were part of the study?
Answer: 6,000

Question: What was the age range of people studied?
Answer: seven to 84

Question: Who did downloaders want to help by avoiding studios and record companies?
Answer: artists

Question: What researchers conducted a study in the later part of May 2014?

Question: How many people weren't part of the study?

Question: What was the age range of dogs studied?

Question: Who did uploaders want to help by avoiding studios and record companies?

Question: Who did downloaders want to hurt by avoiding studios and record companies?
Copyright_infringement

According to the same study, even though digital piracy inflicts additional costs on the production side of media, it also offers the main access to media goods in developing countries. The strong tradeoffs that favor using digital piracy in developing economies dictate the current neglected law enforcements toward digital piracy. In China, the issue of digital infringement is not merely legal, but social – originating from the high demand for cheap and affordable goods as well as the governmental connections of the businesses which produce such goods.

Question: Even though piracy adds costs to production, what else is offered to developing countries?
Answer: main access to media goods

Question: What do the tradeoffs of digital piracy support?
Answer: current neglected law enforcements

Question: In what country is the issue of digital infringement social?
Answer: China

Question: What is in high demand in this country?
Answer: cheap and affordable goods

Question: What does the government of this country provide to businesses that produce content?
Answer: connections

Question: Even though piracy adds costs to production, what else is offered to established countries?

Question: What don't the tradeoffs of digital piracy support?

Question: In what country is the issue of digital infringement anti-social?

Question: What is in low demand in this country?

Question: What does the government of this country provide to non-businesses that produce content?
Copyright_infringement

There have been instances where a country's government bans a movie, resulting in the spread of copied videos and DVDs. Romanian-born documentary maker Ilinca Calugareanu wrote a New York Times article telling the story of Irina Margareta Nistor, a narrator for state TV under Nicolae Ceauşescu's regime. A visitor from the west gave her bootlegged copies of American movies, which she dubbed for secret viewings through Romania. According to the article, she dubbed more than 3,000 movies and became the country's second-most famous voice after Ceauşescu, even though no one knew her name until many years later.

Question: What happens when a country bans a movie?
Answer: the spread of copied videos and DVDs

Question: Who did documentary maker Ilinca Calugareanu write an article for?
Answer: New York Times

Question: What was Irina Margareta Nistor's job in Romania?
Answer: a narrator for state TV

Question: What did a visitor give to Nistor?
Answer: bootlegged copies of American movies

Question: How many movies did Nistor dub for secret viewings in Romania?
Answer: 3,000

Question: What happens when a country accepts a movie?

Question: Who did documentary maker Ilinca Calugareanu draw a picture for?

Question: What was Irina Margareta Nistor's job in Bulgaria?

Question: How many movies did Nistor dub for public viewings in Romania?

Question: What did a visitor take from Nistor?
Copyright_infringement

In the U.S., copyright infringement is sometimes confronted via lawsuits in civil court, against alleged infringers directly, or against providers of services and software that support unauthorized copying. For example, major motion-picture corporation MGM Studios filed suit against P2P file-sharing services Grokster and Streamcast for their contributory role in copyright infringement. In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of MGM, holding that such services could be held liable for copyright infringement since they functioned and, indeed, willfully marketed themselves as venues for acquiring copyrighted movies. The MGM v. Grokster case did not overturn the earlier Sony decision, but rather clouded the legal waters; future designers of software capable of being used for copyright infringement were warned.

Question: In the U.S., where is copyright infringement contested?
Answer: civil court

Question: Who did MGM studios file a lawsuit against?
Answer: Grokster and Streamcast

Question: In 2005, who did the Supreme Court rule in favor of?
Answer: MGM

Question: What did P2P file sharing services market themselves as?
Answer: venues for acquiring copyrighted movies

Question: What studio's case decision was NOT overturned?
Answer: Sony

Question: In the U.S., where is copyright infringement uncontested?

Question: Who did MGM studios not file a lawsuit against?

Question: In 2015, who did the Supreme Court rule in favor of?

Question: What did P2P file sharing services not market themselves as?

Question: What studio's case decision was overturned?
Copyright_infringement

In some jurisdictions, copyright or the right to enforce it can be contractually assigned to a third party which did not have a role in producing the work. When this outsourced litigator appears to have no intention of taking any copyright infringement cases to trial, but rather only takes them just far enough through the legal system to identify and exact settlements from suspected infringers, critics commonly refer to the party as a "copyright troll." Such practices have had mixed results in the U.S.

Question: Who can be assigned a contract to enforce a copyright in some jurisdictions?
Answer: third party

Question: What do outside lawyers take infringers to court for?
Answer: to identify and exact settlements

Question: What do critics usually call these lawyers?
Answer: copyright troll

Question: What do these lawsuits have in the U.S.?
Answer: mixed results

Question: Who can't be assigned a contract to enforce a copyright in some jurisdictions?

Question: Who can be assigned a contract to enforce a copyright in all jurisdictions?

Question: What do inside lawyers take infringers to court for?

Question: What do critics never call these lawyers?

Question: What don't these lawsuits have in the U.S.?
Copyright_infringement

The first criminal provision in U.S. copyright law was added in 1897, which established a misdemeanor penalty for "unlawful performances and representations of copyrighted dramatic and musical compositions" if the violation had been "willful and for profit." Criminal copyright infringement requires that the infringer acted "for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain." 17 U.S.C. § 506. To establish criminal liability, the prosecutor must first show the basic elements of copyright infringement: ownership of a valid copyright, and the violation of one or more of the copyright holder's exclusive rights. The government must then establish that defendant willfully infringed or, in other words, possessed the necessary mens rea. Misdemeanor infringement has a very low threshold in terms of number of copies and the value of the infringed works.

Question: When was the first criminal part of copyright law in the U.S. added?
Answer: 1897

Question: What type of penalty was made for unlawful performances that are willful and for profit?
Answer: misdemeanor

Question: What did a criminal infringer do to be prosecuted?
Answer: for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain

Question: What must a prosecuter show after the basic elements of infringement?
Answer: that defendant willfully infringed

Question: What is the threshold of the number of copies and the value of the works?
Answer: very low threshold

Question: When was the last criminal part of copyright law in the U.S. added?

Question: What type of penalty was made for lawful performances that are willful and for profit?

Question: What did a criminal infringer not do to be prosecuted?

Question: What mustn't a prosecuter show after the basic elements of infringement?

Question: What isn't the threshold of the number of copies and the value of the works?
Copyright_infringement

United States v. LaMacchia 871 F.Supp. 535 (1994) was a case decided by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts which ruled that, under the copyright and cybercrime laws effective at the time, committing copyright infringement for non-commercial motives could not be prosecuted under criminal copyright law. The ruling gave rise to what became known as the "LaMacchia Loophole," wherein criminal charges of fraud or copyright infringement would be dismissed under current legal standards, so long as there was no profit motive involved.

Question: When was United States v. LaMacchia contested?
Answer: 1994

Question: At the time, what infringement could not be prosecuted under criminal copyright law?
Answer: non-commercial motives

Question: What loophole did the ruling give rise to?
Answer: LaMacchia Loophole

Question: If there is no profit involved, what would happen to criminal charges of fraud?
Answer: dismissed

Question: When was United States v. LaMacchia not contested?

Question: At the time, what infringement could be prosecuted under criminal copyright law?

Question: What loophole didn't the ruling give rise to?

Question: What loophole did the ruling kill?

Question: If there is profit involved, what would happen to criminal charges of fraud?
Copyright_infringement

The United States No Electronic Theft Act (NET Act), a federal law passed in 1997, in response to LaMacchia, provides for criminal prosecution of individuals who engage in copyright infringement under certain circumstances, even when there is no monetary profit or commercial benefit from the infringement. Maximum penalties can be five years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines. The NET Act also raised statutory damages by 50%. The court's ruling explicitly drew attention to the shortcomings of current law that allowed people to facilitate mass copyright infringement while being immune to prosecution under the Copyright Act.

Question: What federal law did the United States pass in 1997, in response to the LaMacchia Loophole?
Answer: No Electronic Theft Act

Question: What is the maximum prison time for infringement under the new law?
Answer: five years in prison

Question: What is the maximum monetary fine under the new law?
Answer: $250,000

Question: How much were statutory damages raised by?
Answer: 50%

Question: What was the law called that let people be immune to prosecution?
Answer: Copyright Act

Question: What federal law did the United States pass in 1999, in response to the LaMacchia Loophole?

Question: What is the minimum prison time for infringement under the new law?

Question: What is the minimum monetary fine under the new law?

Question: How much were statutory damages lowered by?

Question: What was the law called that let people be immune to persecution?
Copyright_infringement

The personal copying exemption in the copyright law of EU member states stems from the EU Copyright Directive of 2001, which is generally devised to allow EU members to enact laws sanctioning making copies without authorization, as long as they are for personal, noncommerical use. The Copyright Directive was not intended to legitimize file-sharing, but rather the common practice of space shifting copyright-protected content from a legally purchased CD (for example) to certain kinds of devices and media, provided rights holders are compensated and no copy protection measures are circumvented. Rights-holder compensation takes various forms, depending on the country, but is generally either a levy on "recording" devices and media, or a tax on the content itself. In some countries, such as Canada, the applicability of such laws to copying onto general-purpose storage devices like computer hard drives, portable media players, and phones, for which no levies are collected, has been the subject of debate and further efforts to reform copyright law.

Question: What directive in 2001 let European Union countries to enact laws that allowed making copies for personal use?
Answer: EU Copyright Directive of 2001

Question: What was the directive NOT intended for?
Answer: legitimize file-sharing

Question: Compensation to the rights-holder is generally a levy or what else?
Answer: a tax on the content itself

Question: What is an example of a country that has no levies collected?
Answer: Canada

Question: What are examples of general purpose storage devices?
Answer: computer hard drives, portable media players, and phones

Question: What directive in 2010 let European Union countries to enact laws that allowed making copies for personal use?

Question: What was the directive intended for?

Question: Compensation to the rights-holder is never a levy or what else?

Question: What is an example of a country that has all levies collected?

Question: What are examples of specific purpose storage devices?
Copyright_infringement

In some countries, the personal copying exemption explicitly requires that the content being copied was obtained legitimately – i.e., from authorized sources, not file-sharing networks. Other countries, such as the Netherlands, make no such distinction; the exemption there had been assumed, even by the government, to apply to any such copying, even from file-sharing networks. However, in April 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that "national legislation which makes no distinction between private copies made from lawful sources and those made from counterfeited or pirated sources cannot be tolerated." Thus, in the Netherlands, for example, downloading from file-sharing networks is no longer legal.

Question: What does the personal copying exemption explicitly need?
Answer: was obtained legitimately

Question: What is an example of a country that the exemption was assumed?
Answer: Netherlands

Question: When did the Court of Justice of the EU make a ruling about distinction?
Answer: April 2014

Question: In which country is downloading from a file-sharing network no longer legal?
Answer: Netherlands

Question: What does the personal copying exemption explicitly not need?

Question: What is an example of a country that the exemption wasn't assumed?

Question: When didn't the Court of Justice of the EU make a ruling about distinction?

Question: In which country is uploading from a file-sharing network no longer legal?

Question: In which country is downloading from a file-sharing network always legal?
Copyright_infringement

Title I of the U.S. DMCA, the WIPO Copyright and Performances and Phonograms Treaties Implementation Act has provisions that prevent persons from "circumvent[ing] a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work". Thus if a distributor of copyrighted works has some kind of software, dongle or password access device installed in instances of the work, any attempt to bypass such a copy protection scheme may be actionable – though the US Copyright Office is currently reviewing anticircumvention rulemaking under DMCA – anticircumvention exemptions that have been in place under the DMCA include those in software designed to filter websites that are generally seen to be inefficient (child safety and public library website filtering software) and the circumvention of copy protection mechanisms that have malfunctioned, have caused the instance of the work to become inoperable or which are no longer supported by their manufacturers.

Question: What is the U.S. law that uses the WIPO Copyright as it's Title I?
Answer: DMCA

Question: What is it called when someone intentionally breaks encryption on a movie or game?
Answer: "circumvent[ing] a technological measure

Question: Anticircumvention exemptions are generally seen to be be what?
Answer: inefficient

Question: What are child safety and public library software used to filter?
Answer: website

Question: What is the U.S. law that doesn't use the WIPO Copyright as it's Title I?

Question: What is the U.N. law that uses the WIPO Copyright as it's Title I?

Question: What is it called when someone unintentionally breaks encryption on a movie or game?

Question: Anticircumvention exemptions are generally not seen to be what?

Question: What are adult safety and public library software used to filter?
Copyright_infringement

In addition, intermediaries are now also generally understood to include Internet portals, software and games providers, those providing virtual information such as interactive forums and comment facilities with or without a moderation system, aggregators of various kinds, such as news aggregators, universities, libraries and archives, web search engines, chat rooms, web blogs, mailing lists, and any website which provides access to third party content through, for example, hyperlinks, a crucial element of the World Wide Web.

Question: What includes Internet portals, software and games?
Answer: intermediaries

Question: What examples provide virtual information?
Answer: interactive forums and comment facilities

Question: News, universities and libraries and archives are examples of what?
Answer: aggregators

Question: What is an important element of the World Wide Web?
Answer: hyperlinks

Question: What excludes Internet portals, software and games?

Question: What includes Internet portals, hardware and games?

Question: What examples provide actual information?

Question: News, universities and libraries and archives aren't examples of what?

Question: What is an unimportant element of the World Wide Web?
Copyright_infringement

Early court cases focused on the liability of Internet service providers (ISPs) for hosting, transmitting or publishing user-supplied content that could be actioned under civil or criminal law, such as libel, defamation, or pornography. As different content was considered in different legal systems, and in the absence of common definitions for "ISPs," "bulletin boards" or "online publishers," early law on online intermediaries' liability varied widely from country to country. The first laws on online intermediaries' liability were passed from the mid-1990s onwards.[citation needed]

Question: Who did early court cases focus on?
Answer: Internet service providers

Question: What could be sued for under civil or criminal law?
Answer: libel, defamation, or pornography

Question: What was the result of early law on online liability?
Answer: varied widely from country to country

Question: When were the first laws of liability passed?
Answer: mid-1990s

Question: Who didn't early court cases focus on?

Question: Who did late court cases focus on?

Question: What couldn't be sued for under civil or criminal law?

Question: What was the result of early law on offline liability?

Question: When were the last laws of liability passed?
Copyright_infringement

The U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (1998) and the European E-Commerce Directive (2000) provide online intermediaries with limited statutory immunity from liability for copyright infringement. Online intermediaries hosting content that infringes copyright are not liable, so long as they do not know about it and take actions once the infringing content is brought to their attention. In U.S. law this is characterized as "safe harbor" provisions. Under European law, the governing principles for Internet Service Providers are "mere conduit", meaning that they are neutral 'pipes' with no knowledge of what they are carrying; and 'no obligation to monitor' meaning that they cannot be given a general mandate by governments to monitor content. These two principles are a barrier for certain forms of online copyright enforcement and they were the reason behind an attempt to amend the European Telecoms Package in 2009 to support new measures against copyright infringement.

Question: What law enacted in the U.S. in 1998 gave online intermediaries limited statutory immunity?
Answer: Digital Millennium Copyright Act

Question: How is this law characterized in the U.S.?
Answer: safe harbor

Question: In the E.U., what are the governing principles for ISP's?
Answer: mere conduit

Question: What is it called when intermediaries cannot be given an order by governments to monitor what happens on their services?
Answer: no obligation to monitor

Question: What was attempted to be amended in 2009 to support new ways to prevent copyright infringement?
Answer: European Telecoms Package

Question: What law rejected in the U.S. in 1998 gave online intermediaries limited statutory immunity?

Question: How is this law characterized in the U.N.?

Question: In the E.U., what aren't the governing principles for ISP's?

Question: What is it called when intermediaries cannot be given an order by governments to ignore what happens on their services?

Question: What was attempted to be amended in 2007 to support new ways to prevent copyright infringement?
Copyright_infringement

These types of intermediaries do not host or transmit infringing content, themselves, but may be regarded in some courts as encouraging, enabling or facilitating infringement by users. These intermediaries may include the author, publishers and marketers of peer-to-peer networking software, and the websites that allow users to download such software. In the case of the BitTorrent protocol, intermediaries may include the torrent tracker and any websites or search engines which facilitate access to torrent files. Torrent files don't contain copyrighted content, but they may make reference to files that do, and they may point to trackers which coordinate the sharing of those files. Some torrent indexing and search sites, such as The Pirate Bay, now encourage the use of magnet links, instead of direct links to torrent files, creating another layer of indirection; using such links, torrent files are obtained from other peers, rather than from a particular website.

Question: What do certain type of intermediaries NOT do?
Answer: host or transmit infringing content

Question: What protocol do intermediaries use that include a torrent tracker?
Answer: BitTorrent

Question: What do Torrent files NOT contain?
Answer: copyrighted content

Question: What is a torrent site that uses magnet links to share peer-to-peer?
Answer: The Pirate Bay

Question: What do certain type of intermediaries do?

Question: What protocol do intermediaries not use that include a torrent tracker?

Question: What protocol do intermediaries use that exclude a torrent tracker?

Question: What do Torrent files contain?

Question: What is a torrent site that uses magnet links to block peer-to-peer?
Copyright_infringement

Nevertheless, whether and to what degree any of these types of intermediaries have secondary liability is the subject of ongoing litigation. The decentralised structure of peer-to-peer networks, in particular, does not sit easily with existing laws on online intermediaries' liability. The BitTorrent protocol established an entirely decentralised network architecture in order to distribute large files effectively. Recent developments in peer-to-peer technology towards more complex network configurations are said to have been driven by a desire to avoid liability as intermediaries under existing laws.

Question: What is the legal status of secondary liability?
Answer: subject of ongoing litigation

Question: What makes peer-to-peer networks different than other online providers?
Answer: decentralised structure

Question: What was the initial purpose of the BitTorrent protocol?
Answer: distribute large files effectively

Question: What are the reasons for more complex network configurations in peer-to-peer software development?
Answer: to avoid liability as intermediaries

Question: What is the legal status of primary liability?

Question: What makes peer-to-peer networks the same as other online providers?

Question: What was the final purpose of the BitTorrent protocol?

Question: What wasn't the initial purpose of the BitTorrent protocol?

Question: What are the reasons for more simple network configurations in peer-to-peer software development?