How does CAG feel about Pirating?

[quote name='Clak']Doesn't Disney basically slightly change Mickey Mouse to get a copyright extension? That really is BS, that you can slightly change something enough to warrant another copyright.[/QUOTE]

Disney has their cock deeper inside copyright law than the IRS does my ear.
 
If copyright infringement laws receive a re-haul, I would hope fair use laws would receive one in return.
 
[quote name='TwinRetro']If copyright infringement laws receive a re-haul, I would hope fair use laws would receive one in return.[/QUOTE]

Absolutely. Both need updating, especially for digital content.

Corporations and artists need their material protected. But us legitimate consumers also need our rights as paying customers protected.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Agreed. It's baffling how morals differ between physical and digital products.[/QUOTE]

How can you people not understand this? It's so easy.

Everybody subscribes to a moral theory. Some choose to find their morals in religion. (In fact, many do.) Some choose to find their morals based on evolution. (ie. If it's bad for the group, don't do it.) Some people just choose to not have morals, which is still a set of moral beliefs.

BUT, there's one more set, which I, and many others subscribe to. Our morals are completely BASED ON CONSEQUENCES. I don't murder people because the chance of getting caught is very high, and the consequences outweigh the benefits. I don't steal items from stores for the same reason. It's too easy to get caught. BUT, I DO pirate content, because the consequences are virtually NON-EXISTENT. The chance of me getting caught is so low, that the benefits outweigh the risks. (And keep in mind that if the benefit of one downloaded song outweighs my risk, what does that tell you about how insignificant the risk is?)

There are also many other things that factor into my morals, but this is the basis. Heavy consequences = wrong. No consequences = go for it. Therefore, piracy is right up my alley. I get what I want, for free, and nothing happens to me. What more could you ask for?
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']BUT, there's one more set, which I, and many others subscribe to. Our morals are completely BASED ON CONSEQUENCES. I don't murder people because the chance of getting caught is very high, and the consequences outweigh the benefits. I don't steal items from stores for the same reason. It's too easy to get caught. BUT, I DO pirate content, because the consequences are virtually NON-EXISTENT. The chance of me getting caught is so low, that the benefits outweigh the risks. (And keep in mind that if the benefit of one downloaded song outweighs my risk, what does that tell you about how insignificant the risk is?)

There are also many other things that factor into my morals, but this is the basis. Heavy consequences = wrong. No consequences = go for it. Therefore, piracy is right up my alley. I get what I want, for free, and nothing happens to me. What more could you ask for?[/QUOTE]

booooooooo

You are a horrible person and the reason why they keep upping the ante for stupid shit. "If we want to stop something, we'll just make the consequence insane that way nobody will do it :drool: "
 
[quote name='Sporadic']What do you think of when you think of stealing? Somebody taking something from another person. Why is it bad? Because it causes them a loss and deprives them of their item. If I steal your car, you can no longer drive. If I steal your iPod, you can no longer listen to music on the go. If I steal your food, you won't be able to eat. In all these cases, I would cause you a loss since not only would you be missing the thing you bought but you would have to replace whatever I took.[/QUOTE]

You're arguing that there are two components to the legal definition of theft: (1) nonconsentual taking and (2) deprivation. We can certainly agree that #1 is a necessary prerequisite, but there's a lot of room for debate with regard to #2.

a) is deprivation a necessary prerequisite? legally speaking, not always
b) is there truly no deprivation from piracy? if you take something you never intended to purchase in the first place, arguably no, there is no deprivation. So when some site argues that X copies of this-or-that have been pirated, that can't be reasonably converted to a dollar amount without estimating how many of those are legitimately lost sales (and likewise estimating how many downloads would have never been purchases if the illegal content was not available). if you take something you intend to purchase, then yes, that would satisfy the prerequisite component, making question (a) moot.

To be clear, I have my opinions, but I'm playing devil's advocate here just to spur discussion. I'm always curious to see what people think and how they rationalize it.
 
[quote name='Sporadic']booooooooo

You are a horrible person and the reason why they keep upping the ante for stupid shit. "If we want to stop something, we'll just make the consequence insane that way nobody will do it :drool: "[/QUOTE]

But honestly, that's how the world works. We discussed this in my freshman high-school history class. If the consequence for stealing somebody's wallet was you being beheaded, would you still do it? If the consequence for pirating a song was life in prison, would you still do it?

I may be a horrible person (according to you), but this is how the world works. I'm not going to glamorize it.
 
[quote name='Sporadic']

No, I don't steal a CD from Walmart because if I did, they would be out that product and it would be definitive loss for them. If I had some magic machine that could copy that CD without disrupting the product they have on the shelf...I would most likely use it.

But hey, I'm just as annoyed with fucking idiots, like yourself, trying to compare me downloading something to stealing a car.

I didn't compare it to stealing a car. I compared it to stealing a CD...which it is. If you think it's OK to get stuff for free illegally, regardless of the justification, why not expand it further? Why do you hold back at digital content? I'm not trying to be a smart ass, I'd like to hear your answer. You say it's because there is a definitive loss, but if your only other alternatives to piracy are to buy a physical CD, or legally download it for money, then how is piracy ethical, and not theft?

*edit: Quote tag fail. I suck.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='berzirk']I didn't compare it to stealing a car. I compared it to stealing a CD...which it is. If you think it's OK to get stuff for free illegally, regardless of the justification, why not expand it further? Why do you hold back at digital content? I'm not trying to be a smart ass, I'd like to hear your answer. You say it's because there is a definitive loss, but if your only other alternatives to piracy are to buy a physical CD, or legally download it for money, then how is piracy ethical, and not theft?[/QUOTE]

Here's an example. Let's take a pirate and put him in a vacuum. He does not exist. One day, this non-existent pirate escapes from his vacuum and copies a CD from the library. He crawls back into his vacuum, and the world remains unchanged. Nobody knows he copied the CD, nobody knows that he exists.

Now, same scenario, only when he escapes, he steals a CD from Wal-Mart and takes it into his vacuum. The world is no longer unchanged. Wal-Mart has suffered a loss as they paid for the CD, and the CD has now disappeared into the vacuum.

Stealing and piracy are not the same. Piracy leaves the world unaffected except for the user, while theft can change the lives of many.
 
Pirates are only cool when they're swilling Rum aborad a terrifying sea-fairing vessel.
Otherwise they're just $$$s.

It's theft, and there's no other way to look at it. "Actors and musicians are already rich" isn't a valid argument because more often than not they're not directly making money on the product. They make a royalty (and so does the producer, the engineer, the mastering engineer, the editing bay guy, the ADR guy, etc...) which is miniscule and barely worth the effort entailed in making the product unless it goes at least gold. "Lars Ulrich and Kanye West are dicks and I don't want to give them money", then don't purchase or steal their intellectual property either.

The above example, stating that Wal-Mart not having that CD to sell, is also a logical fallacy. The CD at the library has been released from it's binding to public record/ public domain (it's a nuance of copyright law that will take too long to explain), so it is being used accordingly. However, if vaccuum pirate then distributes that duped recording, he is breaking the law as he does not OWN the rights to that album, outside of personal use.
If the pirate bypasses going to the library and just grabs the album off of mediafire or whatever, then your example of nothing changing and "no one knowing" is also false because had he gone to Amazon or iTunes or whatever to download the album legally, a transaction would have occured. Just because a physical item isn't involved, doesn't mean it isn't stealing.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']But honestly, that's how the world works. We discussed this in my freshman high-school history class. If the consequence for stealing somebody's wallet was you being beheaded, would you still do it? If the consequence for pirating a song was life in prison, would you still do it?

I may be a horrible person (according to you), but this is how the world works. I'm not going to glamorize it.[/QUOTE]
In the ancient world, people were imprisoned for debts and some had their hands cut off for stealing. Last time I checked, you still had people that didn't pay back their debts and people still stole back then. Punishment is Not always a deterent.
 
But what about people who live outside the USA where they don't have the same access as you and me? In China the only way to watch many of the Hollywood movies is though bootleg. In Brazil buying a retail game is unaffordable for the average person. Many countries never got official distribution from the movie, music, and gaming industries.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']There are also many other things that factor into my morals, but this is the basis. Heavy consequences = wrong. No consequences = go for it. Therefore, piracy is right up my alley. I get what I want, for free, and nothing happens to me. What more could you ask for?[/QUOTE]

Damn dude. If that's the case then you probably are going to kill someone in the future. You can talk yourself into almost anything after a few beers.
 
[quote name='62t']But what about people who live outside the USA where they don't have the same access as you and me? In China the only way to watch many of the Hollywood movies is though bootleg. In Brazil buying a retail game is unaffordable for the average person. Many countries never got official distribution from the movie, music, and gaming industries.[/QUOTE]

Oh those poor victims, let's justify them breaking the law!
 
pirate_monkey_yar.jpg
 
I did forget about this, actually, but... Does anybody remember this? Of course you do, it was big news.

http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/03/31/x-men-origins-wolverine-workprint-leaked-online/


For those who don't like clicking links, it's about when a DVD-quality Wolverine workprint was put on the internet. Did anybody have to apply for government assistance because a legion of people (pirates and non-pirates alike) downloaded and watched it? No, not quite. It made $84 million on it's first weekend. How many other movies have done that since then? Maybe five or six tops?


Let's face it, nobody wants to pay for shitty movies or music or games. Who wouldn't want to kick the industry in the mouth for paying $60 for a mediocre game and only being able to get a fraction back?

Again, I will reiterate. Piracy isn't burning down the media industry like they act. Pirates have little morals, but there is one thing they enjoy.... Sharing. If somebody downloads a stellar cd, they will make sure others know about it, and that can, in the long run, help an independent artist much more than skipping over it because they'd rather not spend $10 and take a chance.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']Here's an example. Let's take a pirate and put him in a vacuum. He does not exist. One day, this non-existent pirate escapes from his vacuum and copies a CD from the library. He crawls back into his vacuum, and the world remains unchanged. Nobody knows he copied the CD, nobody knows that he exists.

Now, same scenario, only when he escapes, he steals a CD from Wal-Mart and takes it into his vacuum. The world is no longer unchanged. Wal-Mart has suffered a loss as they paid for the CD, and the CD has now disappeared into the vacuum.

Stealing and piracy are not the same. Piracy leaves the world unaffected except for the user, while theft can change the lives of many.[/QUOTE]

You left out one part of the non-vaccuum world. Scenario 1-the artist received royalties for the library's purchased CD. Scenario 2 they don't, so the artist has suffered a loss for his/her royalties on intellectual property while the thief returns to the vaccuum.

Piracy leaves you unaffected apparently. It doesn't do that for everyone involved. It's illegal, you choose to break the law. I don't make believe in my head on why what I'm doing is martyrdom and somehow validates breaking the law.
 
Piracy as a whole blows but is something that has been around since the days of Beta Tapes and beyond. Unfortunately It's almost like religion "you can't have good with out evil" and that holds true for the entertainment industry.

Sony , Toshiba and other hardware manufacturers helped piracy the most back in the 80's when the dual VCR recorders came out. Yeah I understand their point was a great way to copy little Timmy school play for grandma but the dual VCR was still close to $200 cheaper then the camcorder so it was easy for people to rent movies and copy them with VHS tape running on SLP 3 movies per tape but that wasn't there intention and had no idea people would do such a horrible thing.

Piracy is so widely ridiculed now because of the internet but is almost the same now as it was then just now we have Google and back then people had to find decent BBS (Bulletin Board Service for the younglings) that offered software and even games if you had the ability at home to blank a NES cartridge.

And as far as laws go whos law ? the laws in the US don't spread to the rest of the world were piracy is ok

Piracy has hurt and helped many aspects of everything example before the Xbox360 DVD Firmware hack many DVD DL disc were astronomical in price. Not even 2 months after the DVD hack went public DVD DL dropped drastically in price , sign of changing media or a increase in sales due to the wide use of the format by pirates.

The whole pirates are quick to dismiss a game cause they didn't pay for it is just false , sorry but I know many people who pirate everything under the sun and if a game sucks it's cause it sucks or just not their type of style not cause they got it for free.

I'll admit that I download Fallout New Vegas playing now awesome game but yet like the other boneheads in my area I am going to go stand outside of a store tonight in the cold to pick up the collectors edition like everyone else to show my support for the game by buying a legal legit copy.

Now what about the people piracy helps far and few but there out there. Friend of a friend had her husband leave her and he took all the media CD's , games , movies etc with him and left his own son with nothing. I was contacted explained the situation and burned out 10 games for this kid and donated a game system to the family , so i guess that makes me a criminal even though I took no money for services rendered and a now jobless single mother was able to bring some happiness to her son going through a rough time.

Video game , music and movies piracy hold nothing compared to other forms of piracy in there costly state. Dish Network spent over 3 million dollars in 1 year to combat satellite piracy and the only thing they did was cut off half of the people doing it as new ways were found within 48 hours and are still fighting the good but costly fight at the expense of their customers by using flawed technology rather then creating new technology like Direct TV did.
 
[quote name='nasum']Pirates are only cool when they're swilling Rum aborad a terrifying sea-fairing vessel.
Otherwise they're just $$$s.

It's theft, and there's no other way to look at it. "Actors and musicians are already rich" isn't a valid argument because more often than not they're not directly making money on the product. They make a royalty (and so does the producer, the engineer, the mastering engineer, the editing bay guy, the ADR guy, etc...) which is miniscule and barely worth the effort entailed in making the product unless it goes at least gold. "Lars Ulrich and Kanye West are dicks and I don't want to give them money", then don't purchase or steal their intellectual property either.

The above example, stating that Wal-Mart not having that CD to sell, is also a logical fallacy. The CD at the library has been released from it's binding to public record/ public domain (it's a nuance of copyright law that will take too long to explain), so it is being used accordingly. However, if vaccuum pirate then distributes that duped recording, he is breaking the law as he does not OWN the rights to that album, outside of personal use.
If the pirate bypasses going to the library and just grabs the album off of mediafire or whatever, then your example of nothing changing and "no one knowing" is also false because had he gone to Amazon or iTunes or whatever to download the album legally, a transaction would have occured. Just because a physical item isn't involved, doesn't mean it isn't stealing.[/QUOTE]

What exactly is stealing then? Because if no physical change actually happens, what is stealing? What I am taking if I'm not actually taking a CD?


[quote name='dohdough']In the ancient world, people were imprisoned for debts and some had their hands cut off for stealing. Last time I checked, you still had people that didn't pay back their debts and people still stole back then. Punishment is Not always a deterent.[/QUOTE]

I didn't say it worked all the time, I said it worked. I can guarantee you that in the ancient world, there were far few petty theirs than there are today. Wouldn't you agree? Punishment doesn't work 100%, but it sure as hell works quite a bit.

[quote name='javeryh']Damn dude. If that's the case then you probably are going to kill someone in the future. You can talk yourself into almost anything after a few beers.[/QUOTE]

Now now, I did say that there were other things that play into my morals. That's just an outline. For instance, I couldn't kill anybody because one, I don't have the balls, and two, I'd probably drive myself insane afterward (aka I don't have the balls). :lol:

EDIT:

[quote name='berzirk']You left out one part of the non-vaccuum world. Scenario 1-the artist received royalties for the library's purchased CD. Scenario 2 they don't, so the artist has suffered a loss for his/her royalties on intellectual property while the thief returns to the vaccuum.

Piracy leaves you unaffected apparently. It doesn't do that for everyone involved. It's illegal, you choose to break the law. I don't make believe in my head on why what I'm doing is martyrdom and somehow validates breaking the law.[/QUOTE]

Really? Who else does it affect if I download a song? Or, let's phrase it differently. You say that it affects other people, therefore, the world is changed. So, let's say that 10 minutes ago, I may or may not have downloaded the new Metallica album. Would you be able to talk to the members of Metallica, and based on their stories, tell me whether or not I actually downloaded the album? After all, it doesn't only affect me, so there should be some effects to the world besides the addition of data to my hard drive.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']BUT, there's one more set, which I, and many others subscribe to. Our morals are completely BASED ON CONSEQUENCES. I don't murder people because the chance of getting caught is very high, and the consequences outweigh the benefits. I don't steal items from stores for the same reason. It's too easy to get caught. BUT, I DO pirate content, because the consequences are virtually NON-EXISTENT. The chance of me getting caught is so low, that the benefits outweigh the risks. (And keep in mind that if the benefit of one downloaded song outweighs my risk, what does that tell you about how insignificant the risk is?)
[/QUOTE]

That's not another set of morals. That's a complete absence of morals. That's pure hedonism--maximize pleasure, minimize pain.

No conscience or notion of right and wrong. Simple cost-benefit analysis of whether it's worth the risk to take what you want illegally.

And that's why you see the harsh penalties. It's hard to get the certainty of being caught for piracy up, so they try to vastly increase the severity. Which is faulty are research on deterrence finds that certainty of punishment matters a great deal more than severity of punishment.

So the real challenge moving into the digital age is how to increase the number of people caught violating copyright laws. Not to make extereme examples of a very few people who get caught.
 
[quote name='Vulgarism']
Let's face it, nobody wants to pay for shitty movies or music or games. Who wouldn't want to kick the industry in the mouth for paying $60 for a mediocre game and only being able to get a fraction back?
[/QUOTE]

Why the hell do you want to waste time on shitty movies, music or games even if you can download them illegally for free?

Free time is precious, I'm not wasting it on movies, music or games I think will suck regardless of price.

If I don't think something is good enough to spend the money on it, I'm not going to bother spending the time on it period.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']That's not another set of morals. That's a complete absence of morals. That's pure hedonism--maximize pleasure, minimize pain.

No conscience or notion of right and wrong. Simple cost-benefit analysis of whether it's worth the risk to take what you want illegally.

And that's why you see the harsh penalties. It's hard to get the certainty of being caught for piracy up, so they try to vastly increase the severity. Which is faulty are research on deterrence finds that certainty of punishment matters a great deal more than severity of punishment.

So the real challenge moving into the digital age is how to increase the number of people caught violating copyright laws. Not to make extereme examples of a very few people who get caught.[/QUOTE]

Who's laws? last time I checked USA copyright laws don't extend to the rest of the world in all areas and in many places copying a CD , movie or game isn't illegal

I guess it's better to over crowed our prisons with dangerous pirates with lose morals then the child molesters eying up the playground with lesser ones
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']That's not another set of morals. That's a complete absence of morals. That's pure hedonism--maximize pleasure, minimize pain.

No conscience or notion of right and wrong. Simple cost-benefit analysis of whether it's worth the risk to take what you want illegally.[/QUOTE]

I did say that wasn't the ONLY part of my morals.

But OK, whatever. Let's hear about you? What exactly are YOUR morals based on? How do you determine what is right and wrong?
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']Really? Who else does it affect if I download a song? Or, let's phrase it differently. You say that it affects other people, therefore, the world is changed. So, let's say that 10 minutes ago, I may or may not have downloaded the new Metallica album. Would you be able to talk to the members of Metallica, and based on their stories, tell me whether or not I actually downloaded the album? After all, it doesn't only affect me, so there should be some effects to the world besides the addition of data to my hard drive.[/QUOTE]

They get a buck or two on the sale of an album off of royalties. Will a band like Metallica miss that? No, probably not. Thousands of people could do it and they likely wouldn't miss it, but that starts to take a "if you're not caught, then it's not breaking the law" mentality. Some may hold that view, not me.

Would you feel that getting hit with $100,000 in fines and possible jail time is a good risk/reward situation? Again, to me, it's not really worth it. I'd rather scale back my spending, or just cough up the money to buy the things I want, if the alternative is illegally acquiring them and paying many times more in fines or jail time.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Why the hell do you want to waste time on shitty movies, music or games even if you can download them illegally for free?

Free time is precious, I'm not wasting it on movies, music or games I think will suck regardless of price.

If I don't think something is good enough to spend the money on it, I'm not going to bother spending the time on it period.[/QUOTE]


Are you implying you can tell me what will be good or will be bad? I've learned from my mistakes, I rarely go to the theater anymore. The last movie I saw in theaters was Where the Wild Things Are. I have no problem waiting a few months for a movie to come out on DVD. But, when I want to explore some older horror films, there's a good number that never made it out over here, and the only other resort is spending $50 or $60 importing it from some small Italian store.


Plus, thanks to the wonder of the internet, I've not only found the band te', but I've told everybody I know who would be into them about them. I've found their cds on Amazon.jp for roughly $40 or so a piece, but just because I can't spend that on importing the cd, letting everybody I know know about them is better than letting them fade into obscurity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_KcdfrErOM&feature=related


There, I just helped promote a band that a majority of the people in this thread didn't know.



Is piracy morally wrong? Yes. But, for many up-and-coming artists and filmmakers, it's not necessarily harmful and could potentially help them. You can find hundreds upon hundreds of bands willing to let people take their cd for free so they can spread their music. I can have 20 people know who I am as an artist for giving my cds away, or I could have maybe one or two people buy the cd and MAYBE tell their friends.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']I did say that wasn't the ONLY part of my morals.
[/QUOTE]

I wasn't saying that you had no morals, just that what you described as a "second set of morals" was not another set of morals--but lack of morals.


[quote name='bubbafett4hire']Who's laws? last time I checked USA copyright laws don't extend to the rest of the world in all areas and in many places copying a CD , movie or game isn't illegal

I guess it's better to over crowed our prisons with dangerous pirates with lose morals then the child molesters eying up the playground with lesser ones[/QUOTE]

No. Copyright infringement would be a misdemeanor with a small fine etc. as punishment. Something like value of the content plus 10% etc. Much more lenient than the absurd penalites given out in civil court currently.

And being I'm in the US, I'm talking about US laws. But for 100% sure you're point is a major challenge as we move into the digital age and true global markets. At some point digital goods will need to come under international law.

My best guess is what happens decades down the road when uber broad band is everywhere is that we no longer buy music, movies or books etc. to own, but pay for access to instant streaming services.

Then they can crack down hard on sites/users who captures streams and distribute files etc.

It sucks, but piracy is a huge threat in a world of digital distribution and it will drive media companies to go for total control over their content and streaming only is the way to do that.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Welp...I guess we won't be making mixed tapes for our gf/bf/SO's anymore. HAHHAHALOLOLOLZ[/QUOTE]

I imagine somebody could make up a mini-guillotine that flies and would come along and chop off their ears if they didn't pay for a second copy or two dozen more copies. Because, you know, somebody wouldn't be getting their fair share and all.

It's not enough for you to pay for a movie or video game once, but then you have to pay for it again if you want the soundtrack (which is within the media you already paid for). Then you might have to pay for the same movie or game again in a few years when a new console comes out (and not all re-releases are going to be given a face-lift with improved visual quality, sound, and extra features).

I'm of the opinion that companies who produce discs of plastic and silicon are predators on the public's pocket-book and should dealt with cautiously. It's gotten to the point where I'll look up a CD or movie on youtube before making a purchase just to make sure I'm not buying the specially edited version of the movie that has 45 minutes chopped off, or a CD that turns out to be "Live" and mixed with really poor audio quality. As long as companies put out P.O.S. (plural) to milk the cash cow; consumers are going have to peek over the fence for their own protection.
 
[quote name='Vulgarism']Are you implying you can tell me what will be good or will be bad? [/QUOTE]

With pretty good accuracy, yes. Between reviews, trailers, excerpts, past experience and knowledge of my likes and dislikes I seldom see a movie or read a book or play a game etc. that I end up hating.

And there's just a vast array of free to cheap options for consuming things today. Even if one can't afford the $9 a month for netflix there's $1 Redbox rentals, free checkouts from the library, borrowing from friends or family, etc.

For games there are rentals, waiting for cheap deals, trading on sites like this one rather than buying etc.

Music many big bands stream songs from there new albums (if not the whole album) on there website or myspace pages, allow fans to trade recordings of live shows, up and coming bands often give songs away to build a following.

So no, I don't buy the excuse that it costs too much, and involves too much paying for crappy content, to enjoy media without piracy.

In a world where for $9 a month I can watch as many movies as I have time for in month between disc rentals and streaming video (and the other examples above) that justification just doesn't fly.
 
[quote name='berzirk']They get a buck or two on the sale of an album off of royalties. Will a band like Metallica miss that? No, probably not. Thousands of people could do it and they likely wouldn't miss it, but that starts to take a "if you're not caught, then it's not breaking the law" mentality. Some may hold that view, not me.

Would you feel that getting hit with $100,000 in fines and possible jail time is a good risk/reward situation? Again, to me, it's not really worth it. I'd rather scale back my spending, or just cough up the money to buy the things I want, if the alternative is illegally acquiring them and paying many times more in fines or jail time.[/QUOTE]

But you assume that I was going to buy the album in the first place in order for them to lose royalties. And trust me, this is NOT true, because after St. Anger, if it weren't for piracy, I wouldn't have touched Death Magnetic with a 20ft pole. :lol:

[quote name='dmaul1114']I wasn't saying that you had no morals, just that what you described as a "second set of morals" was not another set of morals--but lack of morals.[/QUOTE]

It helps me decide what is right and wrong, therefore, it's a set of morals. Whether they're good morals or whether you agree with them is entirely different.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']
It helps me decide what is right and wrong, therefore, it's a set of morals. Whether they're good morals or whether you agree with them is entirely different.[/QUOTE]

My point is that it doesn't do that.

It's a risk assessment. If you can get away with it, you don't care if it's right or wrong. You're not getting to the point of conscience if your first deliberation is likelihood of being caught.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']My point is that it doesn't do that.

It's a risk assessment. If you can get away with it, you don't care if it's right or wrong. You're not getting to the point of conscience if your first deliberation is likelihood of being caught.[/QUOTE]

You're right, I see where you're coming from. I should have been more clear in the fact that consequences aren't the ONLY thing that decide right and wrong. But they make it very easy in situations that you don't find to be very much of either (piracy). You're not going to find me killing people on a deserted island, but you also won't find me NOT stealing things from work that nobody will miss. ;)
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']With pretty good accuracy, yes. Between reviews, trailers, excerpts, past experience and knowledge of my likes and dislikes I seldom see a movie or read a book or play a game etc. that I end up hating.

And there's just a vast array of free to cheap options for consuming things today. Even if one can't afford the $9 a month for netflix there's $1 Redbox rentals, free checkouts from the library, borrowing from friends or family, etc.

For games there are rentals, waiting for cheap deals, trading on sites like this one rather than buying etc.

Music many big bands stream songs from there new albums (if not the whole album) on there website or myspace pages, allow fans to trade recordings of live shows, up and coming bands often give songs away to build a following.

So no, I don't buy the excuse that it costs too much, and involves too much paying for crappy content, to enjoy media without piracy.

In a world where for $9 a month I can watch as many movies as I have time for in month between disc rentals and streaming video (and the other examples above) that justification just doesn't fly.[/QUOTE]


You do make a good point, but you keep avoiding a major thing I'm talking about: the smaller artists. You haven't acknowledged yet that word of mouth is the most important thing to them, and, in all honesty, downloading an album can help them. How the hell am I supposed to know of some acid jazz band from Osaka? Now, somebody who has heard of the band puts one of their cds up on blogspot, a couple dozen people from around the world try it out, and start talking about said band. Or maybe some noise artist from a small apartment in Tulsa tosses his album on a niche music site for free, and people download it and donate a few bucks, buy a few CD-Rs, or just send a message telling him to keep it up?

Downloading the newest movies is a bit ridiculous. If you can't wait a few weeks for it to come on DVD or even wait until redbox gets it, then go pay $7 in theaters and if it's shit, bitch about it online so you can try to save others the money. Downloading games is useless too, because you run the risk of screwing over playing online or bricking your system when you mod it. But, if you want to see Begotten, go and find it. You'll have to dig and dig to find it on DVD, but somebody is bound to have put a copy somewhere. If you hear great things about Mouse on the Keys, go test out their cd and experience how great it is.

fuck, there, again. Word of mouth. Choose to check them out or not, I'm still essentially helping out the bands and filmmakers. If I love something and have the extra money, I'll buy two copies. I have a U.S. copy and Japan copy of both Silent Hill 2 and 3, because I love them and would kill for Team Silent to come back and wrap up the series. I'm not playing anymore Silent Hill games until then, because they've gone downhill and I refuse to throw away my money. I fucking love Jurassic Park, and I have it on DVD, VHS, and even Laserdisc. Piracy isn't throwing James Cameron out on the streets. It's not even making [enter rapper] give up any of their vehicles. It is a problem, but is it the biggest problem in America?
 
Here's a good one. Say you head over to Barnes and Noble, crack open a book and start reading it. You decide it isn't for you and you put it down without buying it. Does this make you a pirate? After all, you started to experience the precious intellectual content, and according to the whole black box scheme of marketing, you should have to pay before your teeth even get the chance to break the skin of the apple.

Why, you may even remember a few choice sentences. They're on the hard drive of your brain. Other than a difference of semantics, why shouldn't an FBI guy be legally entitled to wipe all those pirated wrong-thoughts off your biological hard drive? Why is it morally correct to copy under certain circumstances but morally incorrect under others? Who decides?
 
[quote name='Vulgarism']You do make a good point, but you keep avoiding a major thing I'm talking about: the smaller artists. You haven't acknowledged yet that word of mouth is the most important thing to them, and, in all honesty, downloading an album can help them. a?[/QUOTE]


That's all true, but the onus there is on the band. Smaller artists need to embrace this thing and put out some of their material on their own freely on the net and encourage people to share it etc. Or at the least put an album up for streaming on their website so all word of mouth has to do is have people e-mail links to the streaming page etc.

If they decide not to do that, and to try to sell their music and protect the copyright, then that's there decision and piracy is not justified. Tough shit if they screw themselves because of greed.
 
[quote name='Vulgarism']
fuck, there, again. Word of mouth. Choose to check them out or not, I'm still essentially helping out the bands and filmmakers. If I love something and have the extra money, I'll buy two copies. I have a U.S. copy and Japan copy of both Silent Hill 2 and 3, because I love them and would kill for Team Silent to come back and wrap up the series. I'm not playing anymore Silent Hill games until then, because they've gone downhill and I refuse to throw away my money.[/QUOTE]

Silent Hill 4 on PC is also excellent; you should not neglect it.
 
[quote name='Indigo_Streetlight']Here's a good one. Say you head over to Barnes and Noble, crack open a book and start reading it.
[/QUOTE]

No, as you don't own anything, possess a copy of it etc. That's no different than hearing a song on a radio and deciding not to buy the MP3 or the album.

In fact, it's a good example of why piracy is not justifiable. There are generally free and legal ways to sample things before purchasing and thus make more informed purchases and not waste money on things you end up not liking.
 
[quote name='Indigo_Streetlight']Here's a good one. Say you head over to Barnes and Noble, crack open a book and start reading it. You decide it isn't for you and you put it down without buying it. Does this make you a pirate? After all, you started to experience the precious intellectual content, and according to the whole black box scheme of marketing, you should have to pay before your teeth even get the chance to break the skin of the apple.

Why, you may even remember a few choice sentences. They're on the hard drive of your brain. Other than a difference of semantics, why shouldn't an FBI guy be legally entitled to wipe all those pirated wrong-thoughts off your biological hard drive? Why is it morally correct to copy under certain circumstances but morally incorrect under others? Who decides?[/QUOTE]

...you seriously don't get the difference? Consider it akin to a 30 second sample of a song that most online stores offer. If you sat in B&N and read the whole book, that's just strange, but not illegal. It would be like sitting through online streaming music players until they played a full album.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']No, as you don't own anything, possess a copy of it etc. That's no different than hearing a song on a radio and deciding not to buy the MP3 or the album.

In fact, it's a good example of why piracy is not justifiable. There are generally free and legal ways to sample things before purchasing and thus make more informed purchases and not waste money on things you end up not liking.[/QUOTE]

So he doesn't own or possess a copy. What if he downloaded a book, read it, then deleted it?
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']That's all true, but the onus there is on the band. Smaller artists need to embrace this thing and put out some of their material on their own freely on the net and encourage people to share it etc. Or at the least put an album up for streaming on their website so all word of mouth has to do is have people e-mail links to the streaming page etc.

If they decide not to do that, and to try to sell their music and protect the copyright, then that's there decision and piracy is not justified. Tough shit if they screw themselves because of greed.[/QUOTE]


I like that, actually. It's a valid point, and I can't argue with it, but what band wouldn't want to have some extra fans or cash? I do remember [extremely vaguely] a quote from the guitarist of some indie band saying something along the lines of "It's better to give up $8 for a cd and have two people come out to a show and make $20 off of selling two shirts" or to that gist. But, as you said, it should be up to the band in the long run. But, it's easier to digest something you got for free than spending a wad of cash on.


Silent Hill 4 on PC is also excellent; you should not neglect it.
Click to expand...


I do love Silent Hill 4 as well, I just don't have two copies. :D I just want Silent Hill 5 and then be done. I don't think there's anything on this planet that I love more than the early Silent Hill series.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']So he doesn't own or possess a copy. What if he downloaded a book, read it, then deleted it?[/QUOTE]

That's currently a copyright law violation. And should remain one.

One can check out a book from the library or borrow from a friend if they want to read the whole thing without paying for it.

Again, in most cases there are legal ways to consume most media freely (or very cheaply) so it's just hard to justify piracy.

It gets murkier in terms of things no longer in print (but not in the public domain) things not legally sold in one's country etc. though. I still do without in such cases, but I can't get as up in arms over people pirating that vs. a book they can easily get from the library or a movie that's on Netflix or Redbox etc.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']That's currently a copyright law violation. And should remain one.

One can check out a book from the library or borrow from a friend if they want to read the whole thing without paying for it.[/QUOTE]

So both ways, the user did not pay for the book, and both ways, the user got to enjoy the book, but one way is illegal, and one way is not? Interesting. :roll:
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']So both ways, the user did not pay for the book, and both ways, the user got to enjoy the book, but one way is illegal, and one way is not? Interesting. :roll:[/QUOTE]

Fair use laws exist, so that's just the way it is.

If you're a moral person, go the legal route to read a book you don't want to pay for.

If you're not, download it from a pirate site but shut the fuck up about it and don't go around trying to justify it.
 
I'm not real concerned with the whole morality of it. Just more along the lines of business. If people continue to pirate, and lets say in "idea" it comes to the point where more people are stealing than buying, that would in effect destroy the industry because there is no way in making money off of their own product. Why produce when you can't earn a decent living off of it? That's more of an issue to me then anything else.

I think people have the right to make money off of what they produce, whether that be some form of service or something that can be tangibly bought. I don't care how you go about your business, just support the industry you love by supporting the products you feel that have earned your money.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']So both ways, the user did not pay for the book, and both ways, the user got to enjoy the book, but one way is illegal, and one way is not? Interesting. :roll:[/QUOTE]

I think you should concern yourself a little less with what the user is doing and a little more with what the net effect on the content creator is. The reason why one is illegal and the other isn't should then become fairly obvious.
 
[quote name='Magus8472']I think you should concern yourself a little less with what the user is doing and a little more with what the net effect on the content creator is. The reason why one is illegal and the other isn't should then become fairly obvious.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Borrow a book from the library or a friend and

1). At least the library or your friend paid for it, so they got some money off that copy.

2). Only one person can possess that copy at a time.

A pirated file can be copied a limitless amount of times and an unlimited number of people can possess copies of it at the same time.

There's a lot more threat and lost sales to content creaters, publishers etc. through piracy than through the library and second hand market.

Though of course the publishers would kill those markets if they could, but they can't because of fair use laws.
 
[quote name='Magus8472']I think you should concern yourself a little less with what the user is doing and a little more with what the net effect on the content creator is. The reason why one is illegal and the other isn't should then become fairly obvious.[/QUOTE]

Right, so how do those two situations affect the creator? In one situation, the user reads the book in the store, leaves the book, and the book remains unsold. (Which, I might add, is only a potential loss to the store, not the creator.) And in the other situation, the user downloads the book, and a copy of the book still remains unsold, not affecting the creator.

And why is it that just because something is illegal, it's wrong to do? Is jaywalking morally impermissible? Remember all those Germans that helped harbor Jews during WWII? Are they all going to [insert religious place of damnation here] because they broke the law?
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']And why is it that just because something is illegal, it's wrong to do? Is jaywalking morally impermissible? Remember all those Germans that helped harbor Jews during WWII? Are they all going to [insert religious place of damnation here] because they broke the law?[/QUOTE]

Nah, he understands that the law does not necessarily equal justice. It's wrong because he wrote a book or a friends record store went under or something like that.
 
I'll be honest I used to pirate quite a bit and I just slowly grew distasteful with myself. I would get the latest of this and that and never have any desire to actually play or watch it. So now I just buy all my movies I want on Blu-Ray as they look awesome. However, music is one that I don't know where I stand.

While I do feel that the artists deserve their cut of the check I just can't justify spending a dollar for each song and I won't spend a dollar for a song. Plus I have over 7000 songs. No way am I paying $7000 dollars to have those songs. Plus I like my 320kbps MP3's and FLAC rips :).

The only way I can see a justification for piracy in the gaming world anymore is on the case of imports. Not everyone has the ability to buy that import console and spend money importing games left and right.
 
It's really just a pointless debate as it just comes down to morals.

You either feel content creators should be rewarded for there work and you buy it and don't make copies for friends etc.

Or you don't give a shit and are a me, me, me type of person and only care about enjoying stuff without having to pay for it.

Or your some commie nut job that thinks artists should just create for the good of society and progression of the arts rather than trying to make money off their work etc. Which usually boils down to jealousy over people getting paid doing something they love when you're stuck in some crummy job you hate as you lack creative talent etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top