Copyright Infringement
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-10-2013, 04:31 AM
RE: Copyright Infringement
(09-10-2013 03:33 AM)WeAreTheCosmos Wrote:  
(08-10-2013 11:26 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  Sorry, but that's stupid.

Yes... Because its improbable? Yup. But if it happened I couldn't call it immoral... And if you then conveyed with 100% accuracy the movie to someone else, would that be immoral? How about swapping the brains in this scenario for computers? Why is it suddenly immoral?

Let's try to stay in the real world, shall we?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
09-10-2013, 05:05 AM
RE: Copyright Infringement
(08-10-2013 11:39 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  The problem isn't that you have seen a movie, or listened to a song. Hell, whenever I want to listen to a song I want to hear that I don't have in my library, it takes me about 17 seconds to look it up on youtube and have it streaming right to my computer legally.

I'll be honest, I've streamed a movie or eight. Though I never have downloaded anything to have and to hold and share.

To say that it isn't stealing is dishonest. You can justify it however you want to, at the end of the day it still is what it is. If there is a law against it, it's illegal. And there's a good reason for it. Yes, I've broken this law, and I'm likely to break it again. But if it's something I truly appreciate and want to support, I pay for it. It's no longer a matter of convenience, it's a matter of respect and courtesy to the artist.

I would pay for the artists I support, if I weren't a job-less adolescent. Thumbsup

But I do pay a lot for band merch. Too bad I can't illegally download that... Sad
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Ferdinand's post
09-10-2013, 05:18 AM
RE: Copyright Infringement
(08-10-2013 11:39 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  The problem isn't that you have seen a movie, or listened to a song. Hell, whenever I want to listen to a song I want to hear that I don't have in my library, it takes me about 17 seconds to look it up on youtube and have it streaming right to my computer legally.

I'll be honest, I've streamed a movie or eight. Though I never have downloaded anything to have and to hold and share.

To say that it isn't stealing is dishonest. You can justify it however you want to, at the end of the day it still is what it is. If there is a law against it, it's illegal. And there's a good reason for it. Yes, I've broken this law, and I'm likely to break it again. But if it's something I truly appreciate and want to support, I pay for it. It's no longer a matter of convenience, it's a matter of respect and courtesy to the artist.

Stop fighting and make an album I can buy from you already. And do a European Tour so that I can be on the front row someday.

[Image: 9f6.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ELK12695's post
09-10-2013, 10:26 AM
RE: Copyright Infringement
(09-10-2013 12:24 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(09-10-2013 12:05 AM)nach_in Wrote:  There is an unbalance between the right to profit and the right to access these stuff. And polarizing the debate screaming THIEF is not going to solve anything.

True enough. So where do we draw the line?

I wish I knew, I'd be rich by now Tongue

(09-10-2013 04:30 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(09-10-2013 12:05 AM)nach_in Wrote:  It's also a matter of old laws protecting old business models. Considering the law a source of morality is a serious mistake, too often the best thing to do is to break the law.

Don't forget the right to access cultural and scientific works.

There is an unbalance between the right to profit and the right to access these stuff. And polarizing the debate screaming THIEF is not going to solve anything.

It's not about business models, and there is no right to other people's creations.

You can disagree with the details of the laws, but to assert a non-existent right is disingenuous.

Education, whether you like it or not, is the right to other peoples ideas. That's one, I also cited you the international human rights instruments that include the right to access to cultural and scientific works.
The right is there, it's not very well protected and it collides with the property right, our current legal system and business models fail to find a good balance between the two.
I'm not disingenuous Chas, I have studied this topic a great deal and I know you have a very strong opinion, but don't insult me just because you don't agree with me.

Also, from a bigger scope, criminalizing some conducts only brings more problems than the ones it solves. Under DMCA some people had to pay $100K or more for each song, that's absurd!
Even IF we agree it's wrong and bad to download stuff, there's a limit for how hard we can punish things without creating more problems.

The current system over-punishes petty crimes and the business models don't offer profit for artist while tolerating free access or cheap access. In that environment, it's only natural for a clandestine market to appear, we call that piracy (a misnomer imo). The question is not how should we punish pirates, is how we make them prefer paying over pirating?
Netflix is a great model, and it seems to work, but it holds only a small fraction of the market. If we had laws that encourage that kind of models maybe we won't be having this discussion.

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like nach_in's post
09-10-2013, 10:40 AM
RE: Copyright Infringement
Ferdy, can you give a number of how many Mb or Gb's for that matter of music you download in a month, cause the biggest audio download I ever took in was Megadeth's Warchest that was about 600 Mb, and that collection is like 4-5 CD's. Don't you have to download several Gb's to acually make them notice you?

[Image: 9f6.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2013, 10:47 AM (This post was last modified: 09-10-2013 11:08 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Copyright Infringement
(08-10-2013 06:23 PM)Chas Wrote:  What part of 'theft' don't y'all understand? Consider

As an (occasional paid) musician, these practices are offensive and nothing else but theft.
No one is above the law, no matter what contortions they employ to self-justify it.
Feelling you're an entitled (adolescent) is no justification for theft.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2013, 11:03 AM
RE: Copyright Infringement
(08-10-2013 10:09 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  I'm with Chas. When the whole napster thing was going on, as much as I hate Lars Ulrich, I had to honestly agree with him. There was no point in giving an artist any compensation whatsoever for what you enjoyed of them if you could get it for free. It essentially ruined how the music business worked.

Fast forward to today. This situation was probably unavoidable and did lead to the current method of music distribution, which is online via itunes or amazon. However, the fact remains that it is theft. If you like an artist and wish an artist to continue to be able to provide you with entertainment, the least you can do is pay a little something for it. You don't get into concerts for free, paying a small fee for owning a song that you'll have forever is a small compensation for the endless hours of enjoyment that you'll get out of it.

The artist you love spent their life honing their craft, perfecting a tune, dealt with too many soulless people in the industry, toured tirelessly and have given more than you'll know just so you can appreciate their art.

Don't be a dick. Buy the fucking song.

Honestly, if I want a certain album or cd, I only shop at places that buy or trade used.

I have a record player that converts them into mp3 or 4 files.

It's handy so I don't have to pay twice.


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2013, 11:08 AM
RE: Copyright Infringement
(09-10-2013 10:47 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(08-10-2013 06:23 PM)Chas Wrote:  What part of 'theft' don't y'all understand? Consider

As an (occasional paid) musician, these practices are offensive and nothing else but theft.
No one is above the law, no matter what contortions they employ to self-justify it.

Right on. Am I overly upset or offended? Nah. I know that it is what it is. But if we're having an honest conversation about it, there is no justifying theft. This is why there are laws against it. I don't see anyone fighting the law itself, only trying to justify circumventing it. Trying to rationalize their own dishonest behavior.

Have I done it? Yes.

But I'll readily admit that it is wrong.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2013, 11:11 AM
RE: Copyright Infringement
(09-10-2013 11:03 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(08-10-2013 10:09 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  I'm with Chas. When the whole napster thing was going on, as much as I hate Lars Ulrich, I had to honestly agree with him. There was no point in giving an artist any compensation whatsoever for what you enjoyed of them if you could get it for free. It essentially ruined how the music business worked.

Fast forward to today. This situation was probably unavoidable and did lead to the current method of music distribution, which is online via itunes or amazon. However, the fact remains that it is theft. If you like an artist and wish an artist to continue to be able to provide you with entertainment, the least you can do is pay a little something for it. You don't get into concerts for free, paying a small fee for owning a song that you'll have forever is a small compensation for the endless hours of enjoyment that you'll get out of it.

The artist you love spent their life honing their craft, perfecting a tune, dealt with too many soulless people in the industry, toured tirelessly and have given more than you'll know just so you can appreciate their art.

Don't be a dick. Buy the fucking song.

Honestly, if I want a certain album or cd, I only shop at places that buy or trade used.

I have a record player that converts them into mp3 or 4 files.

It's handy so I don't have to pay twice.

Oh moms, you're so stuck in the 2000's. Tongue

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like evenheathen's post
09-10-2013, 11:18 AM
RE: Copyright Infringement
(09-10-2013 11:11 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(09-10-2013 11:03 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  Honestly, if I want a certain album or cd, I only shop at places that buy or trade used.

I have a record player that converts them into mp3 or 4 files.

It's handy so I don't have to pay twice.

Oh moms, you're so stuck in the 2000's. Tongue

My record collection is vast...cd's not so much. Guess I'm stuck in the 80s. Wink

But then again I have a Beatles album that's worth $1000. Tongue

That is actually my own thought. Like buying a rare copy of a book. Sure I can download a digital copy for free...but to hold and touch a first edition, and muse about the people who also held it.


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: