 |
|  |
 |
|
yavoon
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Dissident
Let's analyze the two forms of stealing a bit shall we?
You have one form of stealing in which you physically remove a DVD from a store. That store is now out the cost they paid for the DVD. The owners, shareholders etc are affected by this. You are essentually stealing money from the pockets of the owners and shareholders.
If you get a pirated movie you had no intention of buying in the first place, you are stealing from no one. No one is hurt.
The key to this argument is that you had no intention of buying the DVD in the first place. Because if you do intend on buying the DVD, then you are taking potential money out of someone's pockets.
This is how I am with my mp3's. I don't download mp3's in lieu of buying cd's. I still buy the cd's I want to- just bought Metallica's new album. What I do is download mp3's of all my cassettes that I don't plan on upgrading ( I just don't like them enough to buy the cd). I don't have the money to upgrade every single one of my cassette tapes to CD. So when I download say and old Dio tune, I am not taking away potential profits. I had no intention of ever buying Dio's Last in Line CD. Or I just download mp3's of these one hit wonders you hear on the radio. I have no intention of buying CD's from one hit wonders. But I like the song enough I want to hear it again. In the old days, I'd just tape it on a cassette from the radio. Now I don't have to do that. |
I personally never intend on buying any music or movies ever again in my life.
solves that problem, who wants lunch?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mrmitchell
|
|
The RIAA's official excuse for CD price-fixing is advertising.
Do you ever see advertising for music? I don't.
However, on every goddamned commercial break there's ten or twenty ads for the next movie.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DinoDoc
|
 |
AECCP loves Democracy
Sep 1999 time: 23:29
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Dissident
If you get a pirated movie you had no intention of buying in the first place, you are stealing from no one. No one is hurt. | Why would you pirate something that you don't intend on getting in the first place? I never understood that part of this arguement. Obviously you wanted it otherwise you wouldn't have pirated it.
Last edited by DinoDoc on 28-07-2003 at 02:30
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mrmitchell
|
|
DinoDoc--suppose I am searching for "hot XXX ****" on any file-sharing program of your choice. Suppose that in the results, there is a little-known song "Hot XXX" by a band called "****". That is one example of something you had no intention of actually buying.
Another one is where you want it, but it's so expensive that there's no way you're ever going to get it anyways, although this one is a little more dubious.
P2P is one of the best things for the music industry--it spreads music FAR quicker than any of their "advertising" can.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
optimus2861
|
|
Halifax, NS
Nov 2000 time: 01:29
|
|
quote: Originally posted by St Leo
Oh my, Satan bless me, the Bible doesn't seem to realize that there is such a thing as intellectual "property". |
For that matter, the law doesn't either, not in the United States and not in Canada. Copyright law expressly differentiates between property rights and copyrights. The two are not analogous, nor does interest in one have anything to do with interest in the other:
quote: US Copyright Law, Section 202
Ownership of a copyright, or of any of the exclusive rights under a copyright, is distinct from ownership of any material object in which the work is embodied. Transfer of ownership of any material object, including the copy or phonorecord in which the work is first fixed, does not of itself convey any rights in the copyrighted work embodied in the object; nor, in the absence of an agreement, does transfer of ownership of a copyright or of any exclusive rights under a copyright convey property rights in any material object. |
(Canadian law very similar)
"Intellectual property" is something of a fudge-term that's come into play only over the last few years as big-money copyright holders attempt to strengthen their holds on their copyrighted works, and spread FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) with the general public about what rights they really have. "You're stealing our property" makes a much better PR line than "You're infringing our copyrights." Everyone knows that stealing property is a crime, but infringement of copyright is only a crime if it is not a fair use.
I read a superb commentary article on this a few weeks ago, but I don't even remember who hosted it now. It was a-link-from-a-link-from-a-link thing, and I never saved where I ended up.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mrmitchell
|
|
Ooh, 10 posts on weapons. Especially the kind that eventually end up in madman dictatorships twenty years later.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29. Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|