Piracy

[quote name='Access_Denied']I have two choices: pay for the game, and go without food for a week, or download the game and have spending money. (And not only is downloading the game cheaper, it's easier too.)

Look, I'm not justifying my actions. [/quote]

If you don't have money for both a game and food than your priorities are very fucked up. Sell your consoles and get a real job. Justifying your actions is exactly what you are doing, if you realize it or not.
 
Piracy is not when you move data between two computers, or via the Internet ( which is two diffrent things ). It is when you take a product and reproduce it calling it your own, then the same product has yet made a financial improvement.

Nobody cares about the media content that is floating about on the net as real data. Unless you pull something like hooking up twenty VCR's to record one tape then there is no wrong doing.

Even if you was to stop it those few would dare not even touch the real stuff. It is like tasting royal Jelly and becoming a Queen but in this case the whole idea of value has just slipped your head.

I don't even have a huge collection of it like some I've heard
Click to expand...
Don't blame yourself for the people ( managers who told there musicians lets all switch from record, tape, and cassette to CD. ) who somehow managed to write a 30 dollar Cd to a 5 cent product that is readable on every computer. Also lets not forget we are still in the great depression and no war is going to turn the USA around anytime soon.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']Yes, I do break into houses. Do I think it's a problem? Not really. In today's world I think people realized that someone breaking into their house is a possibility. I think if the price of living was lower, it would be much easier for me to get a real job and no do this. It costs about $500 dollars for a TV and someone people are making $100,000 per year, so it's not like I'm bankrupting them. I think if the cost of gas was $2 a gallon and my rent was only $400 a month, then I could probably pay those thing with my gas station job, but how can I, as a young adult afford that. Again, if things were just cheaper, I wouldn't have to steal a car stereo or DVD player to buy groceries.

I'm not saying it's right, it's not. But with things being so expensive, it's either I budget better or I steal some jewelry and pawn it for extra cash. I mean, if things were cheaper in the first place, then I'd buy them. Anyway, if I see that breaking and entering is starting to become a MAJOR problem, I'd probably cut back. But as I said before, burglary isn't hurting most people, and it doesn't cost that much money to replace a stereo, so I don't see that happening.[/QUOTE]

Well said sir.
 
[quote name='bigdaddy']If you don't have money for both a game and food than your priorities are very fucked up. Sell your consoles and get a real job. Justifying your actions is exactly what you are doing, if you realize it or not.[/QUOTE]

My favorite part is how he just has to have those luxury items. He has only two choices, buy or steal. Clearly he made the rational decision: buying them wouldn't make sense, they cost too much! Stealing was the only option left.

Really, best logic ever. I'll keep it in mind next time I want a luxury item out of my price range.
 
Yes, I do break into houses. Do I think it's a problem? Not really.
Click to expand...
We are talking about people moving data that is considered to have physical value. Guess what? Microsoft sloved this problem by making people unable to move EXE ( program files ) with drag and drop. Guess what I just used copy/cut and presto I commited a crime. Now drag me the go to jail spot.

In today's world I think people realized that someone breaking into their house is a possibility.
Click to expand...
Nah that was the eighties, we got over that, and it basically just the same people protecting us breaking into our houses.

I think if the price of living was lower, it would be much easier for me to get a real job and no do this.
Click to expand...
Hey catch water from sky, and raise a fish farm of carp ( goldfish ). Cost of living my behind, there is billons of alternatives like taking advantage of the USA invention called leftovers. You know like the food we consume. There is also something called a wardrobe like in a cartoon. Lets also not forget to PASS DOWN APARTMENTS TO OUR FAMILY MEMEBERS even if they die.

It costs about $500 dollars for a TV
Click to expand...
That makes no sense? I picked one off the street for free, and you ca buy a 40 incher flatscreen for less then $1000 bucks and still make less then 20,000 per year.


I wouldn't have to steal a car stereo or DVD player to buy groceries.
Click to expand...
Have you ever heard of the of doing without and living with only what you need.

I'm not saying it's right, it's not. But with things being so expensive, it's either I budget better or I steal some jewelry and pawn it for extra cash.
Click to expand...
Just to sit in that sticky movie teather with all those youngsters who think they all that laugh at you and call you nono names for dressing incorectly. Then you might get into a fight with a non-autrodox jew or even worst a gangsta who does a bad impersonations of a M-tv rapper.

But as I said before, burglary isn't hurting most people, and it doesn't cost that much money to replace a stereo, so I don't see that happening.
Click to expand...
Yeah and we all should now stone the people who use VCD and praise Green-Ray in all it's right. May we build a temple of bones made up of those who stood against it at the base and for it at the foot steps. We will drink the blood of the tiffing downloaders who made impossible for there to be a dorky speed racer comeback.

Now lets get back to the crowning of Sir Miyamoto for creating a game that last less then 30 minutes but takes 30 years to finish.
 
[quote name='Mpire-R']We are talking about people moving data that is considered to have physical value. Guess what? Microsoft sloved this problem by making people unable to move EXE ( program files ) with drag and drop. Guess what I just used copy/cut and presto I commited a crime. Now drag me the go to jail spot.

Nah that was the eighties, we got over that, and it basically just the same people protecting us breaking into our houses.

Hey catch water from sky, and raise a fish farm of carp ( goldfish ). Cost of living my behind, there is billons of alternatives like taking advantage of the USA invention called leftovers. You know like the food we consume. There is also something called a wardrobe like in a cartoon. Lets also not forget to PASS DOWN APARTMENTS TO OUR FAMILY MEMEBERS even if they die.

That makes no sense? I picked one off the street for free, and you ca buy a 40 incher flatscreen for less then $1000 bucks and still make less then 20,000 per year.


Have you ever heard of the of doing without and living with only what you need.

Just to sit in that sticky movie teather with all those youngsters who think they all that laugh at you and call you nono names for dressing incorectly. Then you might get into a fight with a non-autrodox jew or even worst a gangsta who does a bad impersonations of a M-tv rapper.

Yeah and we all should now stone the people who use VCD and praise Green-Ray in all it's right. May we build a temple of bones made up of those who stood against it at the base and for it at the foot steps. We will drink the blood of the tiffing downloaders who made impossible for there to be a dorky speed racer comeback.

Now lets get back to the crowning of Sir Miyamoto for creating a game that last less then 30 minutes but takes 30 years to finish.[/QUOTE]

You sir, are a moron.
 
[quote name='Koggit']My favorite part is how he just has to have those luxury items. He has only two choices, buy or steal. Clearly he made the rational decision: buying them wouldn't make sense, they cost too much! Stealing was the only option left.

Really, best logic ever. I'll keep it in mind next time I want a luxury item out of my price range.[/QUOTE]
Didn't you say you pirate? What is your logic?
 
[quote name='bigdaddy']If you don't have money for both a game and food than your priorities are very fucked up. Sell your consoles and get a real job. Justifying your actions is exactly what you are doing, if you realize it or not.[/quote]

As a teenager with no job, I have a limited supply of money. (Although, I have a job now, so some of this may change when I get my first paycheck.) Anyway, with that limited money, I can either buy food, or video games. (To over-simplify.) So, obviously, I choose food. (As most would.) But then, I check the internet. They're telling me I can have food AND a game. Do I take it? Hell yeah. Is it right? No. I guess in a way, I am justifying my actions. But I'm not trying to. :whistle2:s I know what I do is wrong, but honestly, I don't give a fuck.


And Ramstoria, am I physically stealing items from people? No. So in my mind, it's not the same as theft. Would I break into houses for a living? No. I would feel too bad for the families that I rob, especially since they're probably just as poor as me. BUT, would I download a copy of XP, when Bill Gates isn't physically losing anything, and he's got more money than he knows what to do with? Hell yeah I will.

Now, you can have a different opinion, I don't care, you have the right to one. But to me, copying data that doesn't actually exist in a physical form isn't the same as stealing phyiscal items. (Although, I guess the grooves on a hard drive disc could be considered physical, but that's just splitting hairs.)
 
[quote name='Koggit']My favorite part is how he just has to have those luxury items. He has only two choices, buy or steal. Clearly he made the rational decision: buying them wouldn't make sense, they cost too much! Stealing was the only option left.

Really, best logic ever. I'll keep it in mind next time I want a luxury item out of my price range.[/quote]
Again, I think that's a bit of an over simplification. I wouldn't steal a car that I really wanted. But, if I could go to the car lot, and make an exact copy of the car without the car lot ever knowing, AND it was virtually impossible for me to get caught, I'd do it.

And you know what? Here's my logic behind everything: If I can get it for free, why pay for it? So if that means stealing it, then yes, I guess I will. But since 'stealing' games is much easier and much less dangerous that stealing cars, I 'steal' games a lot more often. ;)

Anyway, I'm done with this conversation. I'm a pirate, I don't care. I don't care that it's illegal. I don't care that I'm stealing. I have no morals. I'd steal sugar if it was easy enough. Anything else? Nope, I've pretty much covered it.
 
I lol'd when I got to "I'd steal sugar if it was easy enough."

Just... awesome. Yeah, just awesome.

[quote name='docvinh']Didn't you say you pirate? What is your logic?[/QUOTE]

Yes, I do pirate. But why do you expect me to rationalize it?
 
[quote name='Koggit']I lol'd when I got to "I'd steal sugar if it was easy enough."

Just... awesome. Yeah, just awesome.



Yes, I do pirate. But why do you expect me to rationalize it?[/QUOTE]

Well, certainly there is a reason why you do it. If you're being critical of other people's rationalizations, you should put your own reasons out there for people to compare.
 
[quote name='docvinh']Well, certainly there is a reason why you do it. If you're being critical of other people's rationalizations, you should put your own reasons out there for people to compare.[/quote]

It's more fun the other way.
 
[quote name='docvinh']Well, certainly there is a reason why you do it. If you're being critical of other people's rationalizations, you should put your own reasons out there for people to compare.[/QUOTE]

The reason should be clear enough to go unstated: I want things and don't want to pay for things. What other reason is there?

Unlike AD, I actually don't try to justify what I do. There is no rationalization.
 
[quote name='Koggit']The reason should be clear enough to go unstated: I want things and don't want to pay for things. What other reason is there?

Unlike AD, I actually don't try to justify what I do. There is no rationalization.[/QUOTE]

Well, that can't just be it. If that was true, why wouldn't you just go out and take everything you didn't want to pay for? In some way, you have to rationalize why you would pay for one thing, but not pay for another.
 
[quote name='docvinh']Well, that can't just be it. If that was true, why wouldn't you just go out and take everything you didn't want to pay for? In some way, you have to rationalize why you would pay for one thing, but not pay for another.[/QUOTE]

There's no other legitimate rationalization--just excuses for why it's not as wrong as shoplifting etc.

But really, the main reason people will do illegal downloads but not "go out and take everything you didn't want to pay for" is lack of strong deterrence. You're unlikely to get caught and charged for pirating something, but much more likely to get caught for shoplifting etc.
 
[quote name='Mpire-R']We are talking about people moving data that is considered to have physical value. Guess what? Microsoft sloved this problem by making people unable to move EXE ( program files ) with drag and drop. Guess what I just used copy/cut and presto I commited a crime. Now drag me the go to jail spot.

Nah that was the eighties, we got over that, and it basically just the same people protecting us breaking into our houses.

Hey catch water from sky, and raise a fish farm of carp ( goldfish ). Cost of living my behind, there is billons of alternatives like taking advantage of the USA invention called leftovers. You know like the food we consume. There is also something called a wardrobe like in a cartoon. Lets also not forget to PASS DOWN APARTMENTS TO OUR FAMILY MEMEBERS even if they die.

That makes no sense? I picked one off the street for free, and you ca buy a 40 incher flatscreen for less then $1000 bucks and still make less then 20,000 per year.


Have you ever heard of the of doing without and living with only what you need.

Just to sit in that sticky movie teather with all those youngsters who think they all that laugh at you and call you nono names for dressing incorectly. Then you might get into a fight with a non-autrodox jew or even worst a gangsta who does a bad impersonations of a M-tv rapper.

Yeah and we all should now stone the people who use VCD and praise Green-Ray in all it's right. May we build a temple of bones made up of those who stood against it at the base and for it at the foot steps. We will drink the blood of the tiffing downloaders who made impossible for there to be a dorky speed racer comeback.

Now lets get back to the crowning of Sir Miyamoto for creating a game that last less then 30 minutes but takes 30 years to finish.[/QUOTE]

5 dollars to the guy who can decipher what this guy is saying.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']Yes, I do break into houses. Do I think it's a problem? Not really. In today's world I think people realized that someone breaking into their house is a possibility. I think if the price of living was lower, it would be much easier for me to get a real job and no do this. It costs about $500 dollars for a TV and someone people are making $100,000 per year, so it's not like I'm bankrupting them. I think if the cost of gas was $2 a gallon and my rent was only $400 a month, then I could probably pay those thing with my gas station job, but how can I, as a young adult afford that. Again, if things were just cheaper, I wouldn't have to steal a car stereo or DVD player to buy groceries.

I'm not saying it's right, it's not. But with things being so expensive, it's either I budget better or I steal some jewelry and pawn it for extra cash. I mean, if things were cheaper in the first place, then I'd buy them. Anyway, if I see that breaking and entering is starting to become a MAJOR problem, I'd probably cut back. But as I said before, burglary isn't hurting most people, and it doesn't cost that much money to replace a stereo, so I don't see that happening.[/quote]

Yes, yes you make an excellent point

mini-poop.jpg

 
no matter what u guys say, no matter what loopholes u want 2 exploit, piracy is piracy. it a term coined way before the internet age; our age just "populized" it (so to speak).sure u can try 2 do semi "legal" things but no matter what if u try 2 exploit a loop hole or not if its breaking the law its breaking the law; and failure 2 do say can be subject 2 penalty which includes fines, jailtime, or both. neither which are diserable. so before u decide to "pirate" or "semi-pirate", please keep in mind the consequences.
 
[quote name='docvinh']5 dollars to the guy who can decipher what this guy is saying.[/quote]


Another $5 for this guy....

[quote name='cheapassVigilante']no matter what u guys say, no matter what loopholes u want 2 exploit, piracy is piracy. it a term coined way before the internet age; our age just "populized" it (so to speak).sure u can try 2 do semi "legal" things but no matter what if u try 2 exploit a loop hole or not if its breaking the law its breaking the law; and failure 2 do say can be subject 2 penalty which includes fines, jailtime, or both. neither which are diserable. so before u decide to "pirate" or "semi-pirate", please keep in mind the consequences.[/quote]

This isn't fucking 1995 and this isn't fucking AOL.
 
I have no problems downloading music that I would not have bought to begin with. MP3s are just the new "radio" for me. I used to listen to the radio for free (I still do in my car). Now I listen to MP3s, Youtube videos, or online radio stations for free. Either way the artists were not making money from me.

The moment I download something that I would have actually bought if piracy were not an option, then I have done something wrong. And kudos to RAMSTORIA for his excellent post.
 
[quote name='cheapassVigilante']no matter what u guys say, no matter what loopholes u want 2 exploit, piracy is piracy. it a term coined way before the internet age; our age just "populized" it (so to speak).sure u can try 2 do semi "legal" things but no matter what if u try 2 exploit a loop hole or not if its breaking the law its breaking the law; and failure 2 do say can be subject 2 penalty which includes fines, jailtime, or both. neither which are diserable. so before u decide to "pirate" or "semi-pirate", please keep in mind the consequences.[/quote]

Watch out guys, he's a vigilante.

Death Wish VII - They Stole His Music Career, So CoffeeEdge Hires the Vigilante to GET EVEN

"But I just wanted a backup copy of that latest Usher CD..."

............................................................
img0010306.jpg

deathwish.jpg

............................................................
 
[quote name='Troopa']I have no problems downloading music that I would not have bought to begin with. MP3s are just the new "radio" for me. I used to listen to the radio for free (I still do in my car). Now I listen to MP3s, Youtube videos, or online radio stations for free. Either way the artists were not making money from me.

The moment I download something that I would have actually bought if piracy were not an option, then I have done something wrong. And kudos to RAMSTORIA for his excellent post.[/QUOTE]


to be fair, listening to music on the radio is paid for. its just paid for by the stations and their advertisers. same with online streams (legit ones at least). so even though you arent paying for them doesnt mean that the artist/label arent getting money out of it.
 
The only thing I really pirate these days are books. My library is shitty and I don't want to spend $100+ for every book I am mildly interested in. I pay the publishers anyway for over priced school books anyway (my way of justifying it).
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']to be fair, listening to music on the radio is paid for.[/QUOTE]
I considered that, but I almost feel like the end result is the same. Artists make money from me then since I listen to the radio.

If artists would like to release MP3s of their music with 10 second ads built-in at the end, I'd be all for that.
 
It seems like the main hidden rationality for pirating is, "It's easy to do AND not get caught." If say, stealing a car was as easy as downloading music was, I would be willing to bet there would be a lot more cars stolen. On the opposite side, if the penalties and difficulty of stealing a car applied to music, a lot more people would be denouncing pirates, and many of the other justifications for pirating would begin to fall flat in peoples' minds.

It really doesn't matter what kind of rationality you put down. If you download something that you did not legally purchase, or that is supported by other means and allows free downloads, you are by the very definition of the word, stealing.
 
[quote name='BlueLobstah']If you download something that you did not legally purchase, or that is supported by other means and allows free downloads, you are by the very definition of the word, stealing.[/quote]

Nope, it's copyright infringement.

Controlling language is their first trick.

You've been so brainwashed you can't even see this.
 
Whether or not it is "stealing," I think we can all agree that there is a difference between stealing a physical car and stealing a sound.

But yes, getting rid of negative consequences will increase the amount of activity. Maybe I'm completely wrong but I bet more people started having casual sex when the pill was invented.
 
[quote name='camoor']Nope, it's copyright infringement.

Controlling language is their first trick.

You've been so brainwashed you can't even see this.[/QUOTE]

Not really. Copyright infringment/piracy is taking the work, reproducing it and selling it for property, or passing it off on your own work. Sharing it on P2P gets into these issues as well.

Illegally downloading something for your own use is much closer to stealing that to copyright infringement. You acquired something for your own use that you should have paid for without paying for it. It's really not much different than stealing the actual CD in that case--other than at least the company isn't out the 50 cents or whatever it cost for the CD, liner notes and case to be made.

But these semantics debates are pointless. Illegal downloading is wrong, whatever you want to call it. There is no valid justification for doing it. At least some people here have admitted that it's wrong and that they just don't give a fuck.
 
[quote name='camoor']Nope, it's copyright infringement.

Controlling language is their first trick.

You've been so brainwashed you can't even see this.[/QUOTE]

IMO the stigma attached to stealing more accurately represents the action.

Creators of IPs offer to sell you the privilege of experiencing their work. If you wrote an awesome story that you wanted to sell, you'd make people pay you for the right to read it. If an unauthorized person was reading your book, they would have, essentially, stolen the experience of reading that book -- which is what you were selling.
 
[quote name='Koggit']IMO the stigma attached to stealing more accurately represents the action.

Creators of IPs offer to sell you the privilege of experiencing their work. If you wrote an awesome story that you wanted to sell, you'd make people pay you for the right to read it. If an unauthorized person was reading your book, they would have, essentially, stolen the experience of reading that book -- which is what you were selling.[/quote]


You just described the library.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']You just described the library.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that was a poor analogy.

We get into these semantics debates as people think you can't steal something that isn't a physical object you can hold in your hands.

That has to change as we move into the digital age. You can "own" a digital version of an album just the same as you can own the physical cd. As such you can "steal" digital albums just the same as you can steal physical cds.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']You just described the library.[/QUOTE]

I knew somebody would (erroneously) say this.

The difference being a license is transferred. I can loan you my CD -- when that happens, you're authorized to listen to it and I am not. The creator has been paid for one license, and only one person is experiencing his product. That's what happens in a library, and that's not what happens when something is pirated.
 
Perhaps one day there will be a digital library. I can't imagine how it would work though.

Edit: Unless we had some kind of digital readers/listeners that let us "check out" a book or album for a specified amount of time. I don't think this would go over well.
 
Well this is all a personal opinion.. I am by no means defining what piracy is/isn't.
This is all it means to me and how I view it..so in advance, no I am not wrong :lol:

I do believe there's a difference with music, movies/shows, and video games.

With video games: I think it's wrong/illegal when you download current gen games. Any games that are still in retail, actually. Yeah, we all sometimes come across that random PS1 game that Kmart is still selling..but you know what I mean.

I think old stuff is OK to me since no one is losing money. NOW with shit like the PS Store, XBLA, and the Virtual Console this makes it more unique. The retail copies of these games don't exist, yet, virtual copies do. I really haven't made much of an opinion about this to consider games NOT on any of these download services OK to emulate...because if I consider it OK to download roms that currently on the Virtual Console, but then they eventually come out..am I NOW just being illegal or what?

I guess I really don't quite know where I stand with that.

Music and Movies/Show are also different. The TV Shows kinda work like video games, IMO. If not out on DVD..well who cares? But that same logic goes with the "This game is not on the VC now, so who cares?"..but then, when it does come out on DVD..what then?

Music and movies though, I do think it's illegal. Personally, I don't care. I'm not really a pirate, but the most I ever do is download music. I don't really download roms or movies or shows..just music every here and there.

I think if prices in general lowered, people wouldn't mind paying for stuff. Movies make money when they are in theaters. Musicians make a killing for concerts, live events, and even TV appearances.

Games are just ridiculous prices.

But THEN, I totally understand why some people pirate. Look at the PSP. What hackers have done with the PSP, is how the PSP should have come out. Same thing with the Wii.

I'm at work and mind is going to mush so I apologize if this doesn't make much sense. ;(
 
When adjusted for inflation, video games are cheaper now than they were 10 or 20 years ago, and they cost more to make.
 
[quote name='Koggit']I knew somebody would (erroneously) say this.

The difference being a license is transferred. I can loan you my CD -- when that happens, you're authorized to listen to it and I am not. The creator has been paid for one license, and only one person is experiencing his product. That's what happens in a library, and that's not what happens when something is pirated.[/quote]


True, but that is still a sale that the creator lost out on. Plus, they have no idea if the person who checked that book, CD, or DVD out is sharing it with family and friends. That is especially true in the case of music and movies.
 
[quote name='Troopa']Perhaps one day there will be a digital library. I can't imagine how it would work though.

Edit: Unless we had some kind of digital readers/listeners that let us "check out" a book or album for a specified amount of time. I don't think this would go over well.[/QUOTE]

This is already being planned with Kindle.

I'm not sure why you say it wouldn't go over well. It's no different than physical copies. Even though it's just a file being sent from a server, the library cannot lend more copies than they own licenses for. Just as if they buy 20 physical books they can only lend 20 physical books -- if they buy 20 digital books, they can only lend 20 digital books.


[quote name='GuilewasNK']True, but that is still a sale that the creator lost out on. Plus, they have no idea if the person who checked that book, CD, or DVD out is sharing it with family and friends. That is especially true in the case of music and movies.[/QUOTE]

Sharing is okay. Just because only one license is sold doesn't mean only one person can use that license, it just means one person at a time. Most licenses are transferable. A better analogy to piracy would be if someone borrowed the book & made a photocopy.
 
[quote name='Koggit']I'm not sure why you say it wouldn't go over well.[/QUOTE]
I mean how many people will actually adapt. I don't think people will do it much for music, since music is so easy to pirate. "Why should I give back my Pussycat Dolls album in two weeks when I could just download it to my iPod like I used to?" Many people don't even know they're stealing when they use a program like Limewire.

It could work very well for books once technology like the Kindle becomes more affordable. People rarely bother pirating books because it's expensive to print them and a pain in the ass to read on the PC.
 
[quote name='camoor']Nope, it's copyright infringement.

Controlling language is their first trick.

You've been so brainwashed you can't even see this.[/QUOTE]

No.

I was about to post my reply, but saw that dmaul summed it up quite well: [quote name='dmaul1114']Copyright infringment/piracy is taking the work, reproducing it and selling it for property, or passing it off on your own work.[/quote]

And the library analogy doesn't exactly work when comparing to downloading music. When a library loans a book/cd, that physical copy is the only copy that is ever passed around, not to mention that the library legally owns that copy. Downloading music is more akin to you going to the library, photocopying a book, and then leaving with your "book", so to speak.

If I buy a CD and copy it, then distribute it, that is copyright infringement. Any person downloading said copy without a right to a copy of that work is stealing.
 
[quote name='Troopa']I mean how many people will actually adapt. I don't think people will do it much for music, since music is so easy to pirate. "Why should I give back my Pussycat Dolls album in two weeks when I could just download it to my iPod like I used to?" Many people don't even know they're stealing when they use a program like Limewire.

It could work very well for books once technology like the Kindle becomes more affordable. People rarely bother pirating books because it's expensive to print them and a pain in the ass to read on the PC.[/QUOTE]

And I think that's a big part of the problem. Because downloading said items is so easy to do with little to no consequence, it seems to be justified in their minds.

While I don't think the "It's easy to pirate" excuse works on the copyright owner's end for some of the restrictions placed on the work, by no means does it excuse someone from downloading said work just because it is easy to do. It's just a matter of finding the delicate balance between ease of use, and the owner protecting their work.
 
[quote name='BlueLobstah']If I buy a CD and copy it, then distribute it, that is copyright infringement. Any person downloading said copy without a right to a copy of that work is stealing.[/quote]

This is not accurate at all. In order to steal something you have to deprive someone of ownership of something tangible. Downloading is still copyright infringement. Copyright holders can control the rights to copying, distribution, public performance, public displaying and the making of derivitave works (I'm paraphrasing). When you download something you are making an unauthorized copy of the file - you are not stealing it.
 
[quote name='Koggit']
A better analogy to piracy would be if someone borrowed the book & made a photocopy.[/quote]


I was going to say something about that too. Students photocopy pages out of books all the time. I'm a college bookstore manager and I hear students talking about that all the time.

At least more TV stations are offering free streaming episodes via the internet. I really enjoy that a lot. Nothing like kicking back and watching my favorite Star Trek episodes on CBS.com. :)
 
[quote name='javeryh']This is not accurate at all. In order to steal something you have to deprive someone of ownership of something tangible. Downloading is still copyright infringement. Copyright holders can control the rights to copying, distribution, public performance, public displaying and the making of derivitave works (I'm paraphrasing). When you download something you are making an unauthorized copy of the file - you are not stealing it.[/quote]

read my previous post about so-called "loop-holes". i noticed that u guys like making up laws that fail to exist. guess what? there are laws out there that say u are wrong. basically, if u want to know if something is illegal, do this: 1.do u have to make up some mumbo jumbo about it being legal? 2. do u feel guility about it? if 1 or 2 answers is "yes" then its illegal. case closed.
 
[quote name='javeryh']This is not accurate at all. In order to steal something you have to deprive someone of ownership of something tangible. Downloading is still copyright infringement. Copyright holders can control the rights to copying, distribution, public performance, public displaying and the making of derivitave works (I'm paraphrasing). When you download something you are making an unauthorized copy of the file - you are not stealing it.[/QUOTE]

I understand where copyright infringement comes into play there, but stealing is still the greater crime which is why its definition is more important that the one of copyright infringement. The very definition of stealing is to deprive the owner of something of value that the owner rightfully possesses. By downloading a work, not only are you committing "copyright infringement", but you deprive the owner of their right to determine how that work is distributed, i.e. the right to be able to use and own that work, which in most cases the owner is compensated for the exchange for the right to use. You have denied something from the owner which is rightfully theirs, so it comes pretty damn close to the bona fide definition of stealing.

[quote name='cheapassVigilante']read my previous post about so-called "loop-holes". i noticed that u guys like making up laws that fail to exist. guess what? there are laws out there that say u are wrong. basically, if u want to know if something is illegal, do this: 1.do u have to make up some mumbo jumbo about it being legal? 2. do u feel guility about it? if 1 or 2 answers is "yes" then its illegal. case closed.[/quote]

And if you actually knew a little bit about copyright law, you would understand that a lot of what he said is not being pulled out of thin air. He's partially right in that copyright infringement does apply to some extent. I believe the main difference is in how we believe stealing applies, if it applies at all in these instances.
 
[quote name='cheapassVigilante']i noticed that u guys like making up laws that fail to exist. [/quote]

LOL! I guess Section 106 of the 1976 U.S. Copyright Act is just a figment of my imagination!!! Oh, and I'm sure I must have dreamed up Article I of the U.S. Constitution all by myself!!! :rofl:

[quote name='BlueLobstah']I understand where copyright infringement comes into play there, but stealing is still the greater crime which is why its definition is more important that the one of copyright infringement. The very definition of stealing is to deprive the owner of something of value that the owner rightfully possesses. By downloading a work, not only are you committing "copyright infringement", but you deprive the owner of their right to determine how that work is distributed, i.e. the right to be able to use and own that work, which in most cases the owner is compensated for the exchange for the right to use. You have denied something from the owner which is rightfully theirs, so it comes pretty damn close to the bona fide definition of stealing.[/quote]

But it's not stealing. You don't own anything - there's nothing to own when is comes to works of art. You own the rights to it. Huge difference.
 
[quote name='javeryh']LOL! I guess Section 106 of the 1976 U.S. Copyright Act is just a figment of my imagination!!! Oh, and I'm sure I must have dreamed up Article I of the U.S. Constitution all by myself!!! :rofl:[/quote]

to me, this argument is similar to "pot" smokers (slang term for marijuana smokers).they get arrested and say it should be lgal because its less harmful than alchol, but no matter how many facts they pull out of said ass they are so breaking the law. and for that they go to jail. even if u think ur not hurting anyone if the laws are not in ur favor then guess what? ur breaking them, clear and simple.ive watched a couple programs on this.
 
[quote name='cheapassVigilante']to me, this argument is similar to "pot" smokers (slang term for marijuana smokers).they get arrested and say it should be lgal because its less harmful than alchol, but no matter how many facts they pull out of said ass they are so breaking the law. and for that they go to jail. even if u think ur not hurting anyone if the laws are not in ur favor then guess what? ur breaking them, clear and simple.ive watched a couple programs on this.[/quote]

Dude, he's a lawyer, you won't win. And for the love of god type better.


And thanks for letting me know that pot was slang for marijuana...
 
[quote name='cheapassVigilante']to me, this argument is similar to "pot" smokers (slang term for marijuana smokers).they get arrested and say it should be lgal because its less harmful than alchol, but no matter how many facts they pull out of said ass they are so breaking the law. and for that they go to jail. even if u think ur not hurting anyone if the laws are not in ur favor then guess what? ur breaking them, clear and simple.ive watched a couple programs on this.[/QUOTE]

:rofl:


BlueLobstah: Downloading isn't copyright infringement, it's theft.

Jav: No, Lobster, it's not theft, it's copyright infringement.

Vigilante: u r rong jav (that meens u r not write) cuz u r saying things that are'nt true

Jav: [Source of truthiness]

Vigilante: no u r rong, i saw so on tv
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top