tungsten on 11/4/2006 at 06:19
OK, let me steal your computer and trash it - I promise I won't make any profit.:p
What kind of kindergarten are we here?
Scots Taffer on 11/4/2006 at 06:28
What IS going ON in this thread, GUYS.
Anyway, yeah, Copyright Infringement, that's what I meant. Not theft. But it's kind of similar. ;)
And for the record, I download stuff, not lots but some - mostly obscure stuff that I know isn't easy to find (plus I'm too lazy to look real hard). I used to download like a fiend, but that's because I was poor.
dj_ivocha on 11/4/2006 at 06:53
Quote Posted by Scots_Taffer
but that's because I was poor.
I still am :( :devil:
atolonen on 11/4/2006 at 08:37
Quote Posted by Gingerbread Man
...I also SERIOUSLY don't like the recent mutterings (ridiculous on its face as it may be, it's still a sinister start) that making copies of stuff you actually do own -- for instance, ripping a CD so you can listen to it on your iPod -- is unacceptable use. I know they aren't going to get anywhere with that noise, but it pissses me off that someone even
thought to say that...
Funny you should mention that (and talk about Finland in the same post too), because a law was passed here a couple of months ago that makes it illegal to copy/rip/whatever music from your CDs even for your personal use if the CD contains "a technical copy protection". Now the law is extremely vague and hard to interpret, so "a technical copy protection" can be anything from a dedicated protection system to an empty text file on the CD that is just called a protection. And of course it's now illegal to copy your own DVDs too, because they all have that sucky protection thingy that stops nothing, but is "technical".
...so here in merry olde Finlandia they did indeed get somewhere with that noise, as you put it, and many other European countries are also pushing this same law (it originates from the EU). I hope it won't happen at your country, because this thing is just bs, pure and simple. It's only reason is to provide ammunition for lawsuits made by big companies against individuals. I've already witnessed a couple of such cases happening after the law was passed. I wonder how long it takes for humming to become illegal (you're publicly performing copyrighted material), or better yet, let's make ears illegal. You can listen to copyrighted stuff with them.
Rant over... well, actually not over, but I'll keep the rest to myself :cheeky:
Nicker on 11/4/2006 at 09:41
Quote Posted by descenterace
If you've paid for a licence to use an album, and the CD gets damaged, you're not making a profit by copying the album from another source. The producer isn't losing any money, since you already paid for the music.
You are not buying an enduring licence for the copyright material on the disk, you are buying a commodity (CD) for your personal use. If it is damaged or lost that is your problem, not the artist's.
In fact, you so DON'T own the licence that, according to CAPAC (the organisation that administers music copyrights in Canada) if you play a CD in your comercial establishment for your customers pleasure, you owe additional money to the licence holder for public performance.
Scots Taffer on 11/4/2006 at 10:09
Quote Posted by dj_ivocha
I still am :( :devil:
Well, as long as you aren't kidding yourself that it isn't anything but theft, there's no problems. The problem lies in over-rationalising to the point where you don't recognise the nature of your own actions.
That said, I can admit to some of my own rationalisations:
- I believe that I have the right to download TV shows because not only (was I) paying for a TV license back in the UK, but I've bought a TV and have access to the terrestrial channels that will eventually get the shows that I've seen up to season X (say) of.
- Generally, torrents work in the favour of artists (like GBM mentioned, and I know others) who haven't received worldwide release and hence these are the only means of distribution - it then boils down to (I suppose) the artists' views on this form of distribution, I don't believe it should be at the behest of governments or corporations.
- In many instances, I will download a game in order to try it (shit, if I'm sometimes being asked to download a third of the game's size in order to try a misrepresentative and poorly put together demo then I do believe there's not much of a difference) and only if my opinion is swayed to the effect of "this game really rocked" and has either a) replay value, or b) multiplayer aspect, would I consider purchasing. However, it's still pretty much clear-cut theft in this instance although I rationalise that I honestly wouldn't buy it without trying, so in real-life, I'd probably get a loan of it off someone else...
NyquistLimit on 11/4/2006 at 12:14
Is it legal? No, but does it really matter? If you own the original cds then why should you feel guilty about downloading stuff you've already paid for?
And how can anyone call this situation theft? Stealing is the act of taking away from somebody something you don't own. Is an mp3 copy of a song you already own cause for yet another exchange of hard cash?
What is it you people think you're actually paying for when you buy a music cd? The physical medium? The file format of the audio tracks?
If a cd is damaged and needs to be replaced I'd like to think that you can rely on the backup you made (a copy of the cd or ripped mp3s). But what if you didnt make a backup? Is it wrong to download "somebody elses backup" via p2p? What real difference does it make if was you or another person who ripped the mp3s?
Anyway all this is irrelevant if you havn't paid for the artists work in the first place. Theft? Copyright infringement? Whatever label you care to use. Downloading stuff which you havn't paid for i.e. getting something for nothing is wrong, period. It's ripping off the labels and worst of all it's ripping off the artists who create the music. I do it all the time and there's no justifying it. People seem to spend an awful lot of time trying to defend themselves when discussing p2p. Why bother? You know damn well what you're doing is wrong and if the guilt is so great that you're in a constant state of denial then either stop doing it or stop talking about it. I download because it's convenient (both in terms of cash and immediacy) and I couldn't care less what people think about the subject.
Some p2p advocates seem to try to justify it by calling it "sharing music with your friends". Take (
http://www.freeculture.org/pirates/) http://www.freeculture.org/pirates/ for example.
Quote:
Because kidnapping and killing people on the high seas is exactly the same as sharing music with your friends!
The 12 million people connected to the eDonkey network are not your friends btw.
Scots Taffer on 11/4/2006 at 12:39
Quote Posted by NyquistLimit
The 12 million people connected to the eDonkey network are not your friends btw.
They said they were. :( Especially those on #donkeypr0n... they were so friendly.
But yeah, the argument isn't so much about theft as copyright infringement as RBJ pointed out and as (
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/07/28/copying_is_theft_and_other/) articles like this one illustrate - the whole theft vs copyright infringement is a question of semantics in legality and public misconceptions - but the end result is the same: you're technically breaking the law.
But is it justified in this circumstance? As I said, morally I would feel okay about it by the logic that: well, it sucks to be me, I got ripped off, I want my stuff back without having to pay for it and the means are available to me. Of course, when you take this relation from the digital world (as GBM expressed, although he feels it was inarticulate/inappropriate - I disagree), you can see that the parallel of logic doesn't hold up too well. So I just nullified my own argument there.
Anyway, this is a p2p discussion and I don't really care all too much about it. It's a question and answer that one finds within their own realms of moral acceptability.
So yeah: WHAT IS THIS QUESTION, indeed.
Wyclef on 11/4/2006 at 13:13
Quote Posted by Nicker
You are not buying an enduring licence for the copyright material on the disk, you are buying a commodity (CD) for your personal use. If it is damaged or lost that is your problem, not the artist's.
In fact, you so DON'T own the licence that, according to CAPAC (the organisation that administers music copyrights in Canada) if you play a CD in your comercial establishment for your customers pleasure, you owe additional money to the licence holder for public performance.
lol ur text deconstructed itself
Rug Burn Junky on 11/4/2006 at 15:58
Quote Posted by Turtle
{quoting me}
No fair, you infringeded me by quoting my post. I'm gonna sue.
