Piracy

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by reds4ever
Don't try to justify the fact that you steal music and movies. Embrace it like I do!! Its so easy to do, you'd be a fool not to!!

QFT

[Wezil]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
When you buy a blank music cd, RIAA has been paid.
They can whine, moan, and wring their hands all they want, but they're shitoutofluck, though.

If you still want to spout the corporate line that it's theft, feel free. You're wrong and a sucker.

That's the way it is in this country. We have been paying a blank disc tax for years for just this reason.

[lord of the mark]

slowwy, thats the protection for the hardware manufacturers of recording devices. Thats all. It doesnt make DLing legal, it just means the RIAA cant go suing samsung for making the player that someone used to make an illegal copy.


If someone breaks into your house, you cant sue the company that made the hammer used to break your window. that doesnt make the breaking and entering legal.

[SlowwHand]

LOTM, think what you want.

[C0ckney]

i download a lot of music and yeah of course it's stealing in that i didn't pay for it. on the other hand i buy a lot of music as well, half my room is filled with CDs, vinyls and my fat sound system, and i wouldn't of heard of, never mind bought a lot of these if it weren't for downloading.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by Wiglaf


BS.

Oh, I don't know about that. I download plenty of things I never get around to watching or listening to. I sure as hell wouldn't have bought them.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Whether the music industry likes it or not, they're going to go the way of collieries and blacksmith shops unless they accept that the world has changed and they're going to have to change with it.

They had a good long run - selling CDs @$20 that have a material cost of $.25 was a pretty sweet gig. But the marketplace has spoken. Lots of people evidently don't find they're getting $20 of value when they buy a CD, or $30 of value when they buy a movie. And downloading is easy and virtually risk-free.

Is it stealing? In some jurisdictions, yes. I pay for the right to copy through levies collected when I buy blank media.

But even if it is stealing, so what? I drive well above the speed limit. I drank when I was underage, eons ago. I've bought and sold sports tickets from/to scalpers. Virtually everyone has done this sort of thing and virtually no one feels guilty about it, unless they have some kind of weird obsession with authority.

And nor should anyone feel guilty about stealing from music/movie companies. It's one thing to steal from a poor single parent or a mom 'n pop corner store. On the other hand, the bloated movie/music industry got fat and rich by overcharging for products that cost them next to nothing to produce. I shed no tears for them - the good times are over; now they can adapt or die.

[Kuciwalker]

If you're going to take that route, you shouldn't whine when they sue you, or sue others for doing it.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
If you're going to take that route, you shouldn't whine when they sue you, or sue others for doing it.

That kind of lawsuit wouldn't fly here, so I'm not the least bit worried. Downloading isn't illegal here.

If others get sued, that's their own lookout. Much the same as getting caught for speeding.

[DinoDoc]

The rationalizations you people go through to justify your behavior is amusing.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
The rationalizations you people go through to justify your behavior is amusing.

Good for you. Doesn't matter much to me, but hey - whatever floats your boat.

[SlowwHand]

I tell you what. If any of you have connections with the RIAA, I'll give you my phone number to pass it on.
The RIAA is able to try and enforce in the USA only. Why?
Because dumb****s like some of you just let them tell you they're right and you just believe it. Pretty typical, really.

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Ming


While the current system does indeed suck... It's nice to see some people have no problem ripping off other people I bet if they were the ones being ripped off they would be the first to whine... but since they are the ones stealing, I guess it's OK in their minds

I guess it's just another example of this new generations selfishness... the whole we can screw others, but don't screw me

Ming, its the entire reason I stopped studying music production. I realized the career path was ****ed due to piracy. If I had the foresight they should to, Im not that smart!

Anyway, Its not like I actually have pirated anything in the past year anyway. All my entertainment is paid for. I cant limit what other people do or be responsible for it, can i?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by MRT144
come enforce the law. then the incentive will be readily known.

Y'all seem to whine when people even consider trying ways of prosecute violators.

Im tired of whiny baby "artists". find a way to make money or stfu.

That's where DRM comes from. Stop complaining about it too.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
When you buy a blank music cd, RIAA has been paid.

Wrong.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man
That kind of lawsuit wouldn't fly here, so I'm not the least bit worried. Downloading isn't illegal here.

Downloading with p2p generally is, because you're uploading too. And, frankly, downloading should be against the law. If it's made so, don't complain.

[Kuciwalker]

The economics of IP are obvious. Anyone who denies that the current system is [a close approximation to] the optimal system for producing it is an idiot. Therefore anyone who violates the rules of the system because it hasn't caught up to recent technical developments must acknowledge that their behavior is selfish, antisocial, and should be prevented.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Wrong.

Sorry, Buckwheat. "Wrong" doesn't qualify as an argument. I cited where you're wrong, and can cite more. Put up or shut up. Your opinion counts as nothing in regard to law and facts.

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Y'all seem to whine when people even consider trying ways of prosecute violators.

Im tired of whiny baby "artists". find a way to make money or stfu.

That's where DRM comes from. Stop complaining about it too.

I havent! I think the cat and mouse game is neat.

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
The economics of IP are obvious. Anyone who denies that the current system is [a close approximation to] the optimal system for producing it is an idiot. Therefore anyone who violates the rules of the system because it hasn't caught up to recent technical developments must acknowledge that their behavior is selfish, antisocial, and should be prevented.

antisocial?

[Kuciwalker]

100-nil.

an·ti·so·cial
–adjective
1. unwilling or unable to associate in a normal or friendly way with other people: He's not antisocial, just shy.
2. antagonistic, hostile, or unfriendly toward others; menacing; threatening: an antisocial act.
3. opposed or detrimental to social order or the principles on which society is constituted: antisocial behavior.
4. Psychiatry. of or pertaining to a pattern of behavior in which social norms and the rights of others are persistently violated.

[MRT144]

free lunches are against the principles of society!

[SlowwHand]

Take this caterpillar key. Much faster for digging a hole than that garden spade you're digging a hole with on this subject. Although, you're doing pretty well as is.

[Kuciwalker]

Go away. I want to argue with smarter people than you.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
The economics of IP are obvious. Anyone who denies that the current system is [a close approximation to] the optimal system for producing it is an idiot. Therefore anyone who violates the rules of the system because it hasn't caught up to recent technical developments must acknowledge that their behavior is selfish, antisocial, and should be prevented.

Yes and no. I have no problem with the concepts of copyright, patents, royalties, etc. I do have a problem with them all being extended far beyond their utility.

The whole basis for IP in the US is Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US Constitution, which says (and I'm quoting the whole thing) that Congress shall have the power to:

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries

If the function of a copyright/royalty system is to encourage artistic (and other) creativity by promising tangible benefits to the artists, then is there any philosophical reason for any music recorded by Elvis, or Frank Sinatra, or Maria Callas, or the Glenn Miller Orchestra to be covered by copyright anymore? Is there any philosophical justification for Disney being able to sue preschools for their unauthorized use of the image of Mickey Mouse?

IP protection is a sensible idea. But the way it continues to be implemented and expanded -- with a focus soley on the ongoing protection of profit rather than the original rationale for such laws -- in simply an absurd exercise in greed, venality, and (on Congress's part) cowardice.

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Go away. I want to argue with smarter people than you.

I just dont see the social plague of piracy coming to fruition. sure it might not be the right thing to do...but...but...

screw it. I can live with doing something relatively minor like pirating music.

I rescind all claims of boomers being selfish. boomers are just human, like me. pirating is wrong, but i limit my engagement of it (I hate that most the music I like is OOP or only sold in europe).

I've been wrong but not to the point of no return

[Kuciwalker]

Yes and no. I have no problem with the concepts of copyright, patents, royalties, etc. I do have a problem with them all being extended far beyond their utility.

When has IP been extended, apart from the 1998 term extension?

If the function of a copyright/royalty system is to encourage artistic (and other) creativity by promising tangible benefits to the artists, then is there any philosophical reason for any music recorded by Elvis, or Frank Sinatra, or Maria Callas, or the Glenn Miller Orchestra to be covered by copyright anymore?

Yes.

Is there any philosophical justification for Disney being able to sue preschools for their unauthorized use of the image of Mickey Mouse?

1) that's the extreme case, and we have to accept extreme cases when they're the result of a system that produces the best results overall

2) what does this have to do with piracy?

IP protection is a sensible idea. But the way it continues to be implemented and expanded -- with a focus soley on the ongoing protection of profit rather than the original rationale for such laws -- in simply an absurd exercise in greed, venality, and (on Congress's part) cowardice.

I don't really see how (with the aforementioned Sonny Bono act).

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Go away. I want to argue with smarter people than you.

Good luck on that one.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by MRT144
I just dont see the social plague of piracy coming to fruition. sure it might not be the right thing to do...but...but...

screw it. I can live with doing something relatively minor like pirating music.

I rescind all claims of boomers being selfish. boomers are just human, like me. pirating is wrong, but i limit my engagement of it (I hate that most the music I like is OOP or only sold in europe).

I've been wrong but not to the point of no return

I was talking to Sloww.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
The economics of IP are obvious. Anyone who denies that the current system is [a close approximation to] the optimal system for producing it is an idiot.

Production possibly; distribution, certainly not.

The inability of IP developers to finely price discriminate along with the minimal marginal cost of distribution combine to mean that a large amount of utility is lost.

But you can continue to sputter ridiculous statements if you want...