Internet Piracy

[BuddyRey]

My definition of "piracy" differs considerably from that of others. To me, it's only theft of intellectual property in the truest sense, and justifiably prohibited, if the source does not receive credit for his or her work (i.e., someone illegally downloads a song and replaces the artist's name with his or her own).

As a musician myself, I would just feel glad that people like my stuff, and get a kick out of seeing it proliferate online, in whatever form. The only thing I would resent personally would be having my work co-opted and accredited to somebody else.

Intellectual property rights are very important, but record companies running to Daddy Government to help them squeeze out small fortunes from college kids is tenfold more unethical than any "criminal-minded music lover" who downloads a CD for personal use.

 

[Kludge]

Bump

 

[coyote_sprit]

It shouldn't be legal but the government shouldn't invade on privacy rights in order to find if someone has pirated something.

 

[UtahApocalypse]

Here was a situations where Pirating benefited me:

There was a new PC game out that I was interested in. The specs showed that my PC *should* meet the requirements. However one part mentioned very specific video cards needed. The game was almost $50 and the store has as No software return policy.

I decided not to buy the game just yet. i went home looked up the game site for better details, and it was only the same I had seen in the store. I checked for a demo... none. I googled for a demo.... none.

It was at that time I searched for a bit torrent, downloaded, installed, and ran a "crack" file to allow the game to run with no CD or serial number. I fired up the game, and it loaded.... But the graphics could not be sized correctly. I could only view half the screen, and could not access any graphic settings. I determined that it was likely do to the graphics card not supporting a widescreen mode. The game would not function on my PC.

So was I wrong to sample the game before buying? I tried to find a legal method of a demo, the company however did not provide one. Should I have wasted $50 on something I would not be able to use or return? I feel that with so many PC types, game requirements that you need to have a way to check anything you will want to run on a system before spending the money on it.

 

[Zolah]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7342135.stm

"European politicians have voted down calls to throw suspected file-sharers off the net."

"The amendment called on the EC and its member nations to "avoid adopting measures conflicting with civil liberties and human rights and with the principles of proportionality, effectiveness and dissuasiveness, such as the interruption of internet access.""

The article mentions considered-UK laws which will require ISPs to cut off internet access to customers who repeatedly use file-sharing websites, or something similar. Of course the article also says that governments can just ignore whatever EU politicians say, but at least some people are concerned about civ libs

 

[TastyWheat]

I really can't make an unbiased comment on internet piracy, but I think usage of rootkits and malicious deterrents is wrong. I don't mind being "spied on" necessarily if I know I'm being spied on. Some games I play load a separate process to make sure I'm not cheating. That's perfectly fine with me. If something is installed without my knowledge then I get pissed. I don't think it's ever been used, but the idea of destructive deterrence has been kicked around to curb piracy. No matter what I pirate I don't think another company has the right to wipe out my hard drive (for instance).

 

[angelatc]

So... I'm interested in why so many people don't feel companies have a right to protect their intellectual property. Why doesn't theft still equate to aggression if it's done over the internet.

Why don't companies have the right to use protection software (or rootkits, if they note it somewhere)? Why can't companies band together and form an organization to find and locate pirates through legal means?


Since when did we become opportunistic and hypocritical looters?

It's funny, because the liberal left condemn the capitalists that make "too much" money, but they'll burn themselves at the stake to protect the artisans, who actually do very little to provide long term benefits to any economy except their own. The Disney laws made sure their interests are protected far beyond, say, the "greedy" corporation that spent literally billions on developing a drug.

If we're talking about music, I think the second it gets played over the PUBLIC airwaves, then it should become public domain. Let the bands make money off touring and t-shirts.
.
HOw many times do I have to buy my music, anyway? I can think of at least 10 albums that I had in vinyl, then cassette, some 8-track, then CD...but I'm a criminal if I now download it in an mp3?

If we're talking about software, then let them use rootkits. It will drive more people to the open source world.

 

[pcosmar]

What is PIRACY?

I understand that if I offer for sale material that is someone else's (movies,music or software), but what if I share music that I bought with a friend. What if I lend a disk that I purchased to a friend ?
Is that piracy? The product was purchased. Do I not have the right to use it as I wish?

This seems a way to sell the same thing over and over again. Or denying ownership of a purchased product.

 

[constituent]

i was under the impression that for theft to take place someone had to be deprived of something.

how does making a digital replication of a piece of software code, music, photographs, a movie that does no damage to the original copy deprive anyone of anything?

do the artists, programmers, etc. still get paid this way? yes.

i for one, have been exposed to many more artists, and consequently purchased many
more albums than i ever would have w/out so many "pirated" copies of music floating around.

same thing goes for pirated software.

not too mention the customer service model of paying for software developers to do what they do best...
put the software out there, provide support for a fee. the better the support you give, the more people will pay you.

i support the artists/developers/etc.'s right to earn a buck from their efforts, but i don't support them using your
tax money to come after you to enforce their business model... just not buyin' it.

 

[Kraig]

It should never be legalized, but it should be up to the owners of the software/music to find the offenders and press charges. The government should not be passing laws that force ISPs and other internet services to spy on you, before you've done anything wrong. If a company believes you are stealing via the web, they should have to press charges, present their case, and then get a search warrant that would allow them to lookup your records. Not the other way around. The way things are moving towards now is more like "someone broke into my house, I think they live in this neighborhood, so search everyone's house to see if they have my stuff". That is bullshit, what ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

 

[Kraig]

i was under the impression that for theft to take place someone had to be deprived of something.

how does making a digital replication of a piece of software code, music, photographs, a movie that does no damage to the original copy deprive anyone of anything?

do the artists, programmers, etc. still get paid this way? yes.

i for one, have been exposed to many more artists, and consequently purchased many
more albums than i ever would have w/out so many "pirated" copies of music floating around.

same thing goes for pirated software.

not too mention the customer service model of paying for software developers to do what they do best...
put the software out there, provide support for a fee. the better the support you give, the more people will pay you.

i support the artists/developers/etc.'s right to earn a buck from their efforts, but i don't support them using your
tax money to come after you to enforce their business model... just not buyin' it.

The owner should be able to protect his property how he sees fit, if he wants to give it out for free and gain popularity, fine. If he wants to protect it from anyone who is not willing to pay for it, make him press charges on those who stole it.

To say that record and software companies don't lose any money at all when thousands and thousands of people are downloading and enjoying their work for free is absurd. Most people I know laugh at me when they find out I still buy a CD from time to time. You can't be a consumer and make your own terms for purchasing something, pay the price they ask for or find another product. There are already ways to sample most music and software, it's not your right to dictate when and where you do that, what products you do it to, and how convenient it is for you. They offer it to you, not the other way around.

 

[Kludge]

Bump

 

[josephadel_3]

The whole illegal downloading thing bothers me, because in my opinion it degenerates the commericial production of good music. The majority of popular out today music sucks. It is over-produced, heartless, and plastic. I think stealing music perpetuates this problem. I haven't read all the posts yet. I will edit as necessary. To answer the question: no, I do not think piracy should be legalized. Stealing is stealing. Everyone I know illegally downloads, but nevertheless, I am opposed to it.

 

[josephadel_3]

I'm a pirate so I don't think I'll even bother voting. lol

By way of the patriot act, your IP address has been logged, and the FBI is on their way.

 

[AutoDas]

Of course stealing is illegal. Copying is not stealing. I buy what I like to get more stuff like it.

 

[Fox McCloud]

In my eyes, it's theft, plain and simple...however, if the artist or company puts out a song over the radio/TV/YouTube, someone records it, then converts it to an MP3 (time consuming, yes), then if the song is obtained and distributed that way, then the person should not be prosecuted, as the company "put it out there".

However, if someone copies a song directly from a CD, etc, then puts it out on the 'net...prosecute him.

Software and Movies? Same thing as above.

 

[AutoDas]

Why are people for copyright protection? It's a contract between the government and distributor, the consumer never is consulted. If no one really would pay for DRM-free music then how come iTunes became the largest distributor of music, overtaking Wal-Mart soon after announcing their DRM-free music and then Amazon becoming the second largest online distributor of just DRM-free music within 6 months. And now MSN is going to drop their DRM services.
To me, people who pirate would never have bought it in the first place.

Don't quote me or I might sue you

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

So... I'm interested in why so many people don't feel companies have a right to protect their intellectual property. Why doesn't theft still equate to aggression if it's done over the internet.

Why don't companies have the right to use protection software (or rootkits, if they note it somewhere)? Why can't companies band together and form an organization to find and locate pirates through legal means?


Since when did we become opportunistic and hypocritical looters?

Why don't you read an essay on the argument, instead of requesting to be spoon-fed? It's almost like you create a new thread everytime you want to learn something ha!

http://libertariannation.org/a/f31l1.html

I stand opposed to IP.

kludge, you still committing sedition?

 

[Kludge]

Why don't you read an essay on the argument, instead of requesting to be spoon-fed? It's almost like you create a new thread everytime you want to learn something ha!

http://libertariannation.org/a/f31l1.html

I stand opposed to IP.

kludge, you still committing sedition?

I use the forums for quick access to knowledge while looking for any pithy libertarian thoughts along the way =).

The essay didn't really bring up any new arguments and brought up an offensive argument that thought and creativity on the level required to make some of this property isn't scarce. ("The economic case for ordinary property rights depends on scarcity. But information is not, technically speaking, a scarce resource in the requisite sense. If A uses some material resource, that makes less of the resource for B, so we need some legal mechanism for determining who gets to use what when. But information is not like that; when A acquires information, that does not decrease B's share, so property rights are not needed.") But, if it isn't scarce and could be made by just a handful of people, why don't I see high-quality games being released every hour? Time is also a scarce resource...

 

[Unspun]

I accidentally selected "In some cases it may be justified" but what I meant to select is "of course not but gov't has no right to seek out lawbreakers".