It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Administration Announces Massive Piracy Crackdown

page: 11
60
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   
It pains me as a strong proponent for nonviolence to point out the glaring reality of intellectual property.

"Intellectual Property" can only be protected through the initiation of violence. IP, itself, is a violent ideology. The reason it takes more laws and regs to police this is because without the legalized right to bully the consumer, the music industry, film industry, and science itself would not exist as it does at present. The RIAA and MPAA are fascist organizations whose goal it is to maintain a monopoly of culture in a time when (through Internet and other technologies) culture is becoming a more separated, more accessible, and more specialized than ever before. Science is evolving much the same way.

IP is just a remnant of an old ideology that only a select few can know certain things without recourse. The printing press changed the world forever.... the Internet is infinitely more revolutionary than the press. Imagine what medical and technological breakthroughs have been put off or put away because of the threat of an IP based lawsuit.

Now they are trying to find more nonviolent victims for their crusade to stay in power.

'Piracy' as it is called, is not even piracy at all. The only ones acting like pirates are those jumping in other peoples ships, swords drawn, and demanding tribute.

The only thing we can really count on, as peaceful dissenters, is the inefficiency of government. I am not too worried at the moment.




posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by SpectreDC
 


Nice try. A thief is a thief. I don't like thieves.

Your chart is childish and lacking a fundamental. File sharing is giving an illegal (illegal being the key here) copy of somebodies intellectual property to someone so they don't have to buy it themselves.

Like I said. A thief is a thief.


And like I said, the issue isn't simply a matter of whether or not piracy is theft (it is.) This thread is about this anti-piracy bill, and this anti-piracy bill is a violation of our rights.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by DINSTAAR


IP is just a remnant of an old ideology that only a select few can know certain things without recourse. The printing press changed the world forever.... the Internet is infinitely more revolutionary than the press. Imagine what medical and technological breakthroughs have been put off or put away because of the threat of an IP based lawsuit.

Now they are trying to find more nonviolent victims for their crusade to stay in power.

'Piracy' as it is called, is not even piracy at all. The only ones acting like pirates are those jumping in other peoples ships, swords drawn, and demanding tribute.



I could have sworn my father was saying the same thing at dinner the other night.

I am owner of over 2500 books, 1300 being paperbacks. I believe I should be able to download any copy of these so that I could read in digital medium. I have already paid for the book, I have paid for my right to own it.
Of course this means you cannot reprint the same book and sell it as that is stealing.

I dont know, I dont like where this is all going, I mean the act of trying to control the internet and the sharing between human beings.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 




And like I said, the issue isn't simply a matter of whether or not piracy is theft (it is.) This thread is about this anti-piracy bill, and this anti-piracy bill is a violation of our rights.


The issue with the bill that I have is that it seems to be that the Powers That Be are conceding that the only way to crackdown on piracy is to increase the scope and level of violence. They are conceding that, baring a Minority Report type of foretelling the of the future, they care more about the special interests (RIAA, Patent Lobbies, ETC) and maintaining their own positions than the human rights, and well-being of the people.

They are willing to go to extreme length's of injustice to protect the flow of information such that is betters them and their friends before the people.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by SpectreDC
 


Nice try. A thief is a thief. I don't like thieves.

Your chart is childish and lacking a fundamental. File sharing is giving an illegal (illegal being the key here) copy of somebodies intellectual property to someone so they don't have to buy it themselves.

Like I said. A thief is a thief.


Apparently you're the one lacking the fundamental concept that a thief takes something that can be deemed missing.

You can't "steal" data. It's impossible.

Intellectual property is a joke and coercive concept.

And it's also apparent that for something that is lacking and childish, you can't seem to argue against anything said besides repeating yourself (as if I care what you have to say anyways), saying something tyrannical is okay, and insulting what was presented to you.

Your lack of an argument speaks volumes of what your argument is worth.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   
my 2 cents why drive the income back into the hands of the proffesional pirates who fund organised crime - as if people can't download they'll just buy it from the guy down the pub or at the local car boot sale



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 03:03 PM
link   
the music industry has gone to hell anyway.
STEAL IT ALL, till it's worth buying



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 03:07 PM
link   
all you buy now adays are trailers most of the films i've been to see recently weren't worth the money.

Why buy it without trying it on first



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragnet53
reply to post by mattifikation
 


if MPAA/RIAA ever had that power, then you will see me start or make an attempt to start a revolt in this country. It would be like it is okay for them to do that, but not okay for the Maffia to do that. It doesn't make any sense.



[edit on 24-6-2010 by dragnet53]



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragnet53
reply to post by mattifikation
 


if MPAA/RIAA ever had that power, then you will see me start or make an attempt to start a revolt in this country. It would be like it is okay for them to do that, but not okay for the Maffia to do that. It doesn't make any sense.



[edit on 24-6-2010 by dragnet53]


Why do you think you have no mixer on your laptop? Where do we sign up?

[edit on 24-6-2010 by Nite_wing]



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
I would like to mention one thing real quick. I work in the music industry. Artists do not yield nearly as much from album sales than they do ticket sales at shows. From my experience, it is better to let your fans have your music for free, and distribute it for you and lose a little bit of revenue, than to wallow away in obscurity like the vast majority of artists do.

In fact, I would say it would be far more lucrative to give your albums out for free and have a greater audience, than sell your albums and be inaccessible to the vast majority of consumers who won't pay for something they haven't heard.

This war on music and film fans only benefits those that make money from other peoples art.

It is not a fight against piracy, it is a fight against fans. Any artist that needs to force their fans to pay tribute is a terrible artist. If only people would open their eyes to the reality of the whole situation.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   
I love it. The US abuses its power to "crackdown" outside its borders but Google gets a pass at home...

www.msnbc.msn.com...



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by zroth
 


That's exactly it. They won't hurt their own. Google makes the government a lot of money and gives a lot of support for their candidates.

Logic is out the window with these guys.


For your viewing pleasure



[edit on 24-6-2010 by DINSTAAR]



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by SpectreDC
 


Love the comic



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by zroth
 


But it is good that the Judge made the decision he did. Viva la liberté sur Internet!!!

Now, if we could get Obama's administration to worry more about the things that have people dying, or our food supply becoming poisoned, life would be swell.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   
A story from my past is relevant to this debate. I was raised near San Francisco, California and was a teenager in the early to mid eighties. During this period an underground band came along that really caught our attention, Metallica. You know, the guys who went after Napster so rabidly a few years back and who now try to downplay this fact? Most people don't know that Metallica used "piracy" to get famous.

Their first recording "Kill 'Em "All" had been released on a very limited scale, in those days, and finding a copy to buy was impossible. So we did what we could - we'd find a friend who had a "bootleg" cassette copy and we'd use a dual cassette deck to make a copy of our own. I knew many people who listened to Metallica in those days and not a single one had a legit copy of the tape. They were all bootlegs.

But what we, as fans, did do, en masse, was to travel to downtown San Francisco, often, to see Metallica live at the clubs on Broadway or in Berkely. We also used word of mouth to tell everybody we met of this great new band and to convert them - letting them make copies from our copied tapes.

Without this process Metallica would have never gotten a loyal and active local following and they might never have made it out of a very competitive local music scene.

Anti piracy laws, if enforced won't help the established bands to get that much more money but it will make it way more difficult for up and coming bands to develop a fan base.

At least that's what I think.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by DINSTAAR
I would like to mention one thing real quick. I work in the music industry. Artists do not yield nearly as much from album sales than they do ticket sales at shows. From my experience, it is better to let your fans have your music for free, and distribute it for you and lose a little bit of revenue, than to wallow away in obscurity like the vast majority of artists do.

In fact, I would say it would be far more lucrative to give your albums out for free and have a greater audience, than sell your albums and be inaccessible to the vast majority of consumers who won't pay for something they haven't heard.

This war on music and film fans only benefits those that make money from other peoples art.

It is not a fight against piracy, it is a fight against fans. Any artist that needs to force their fans to pay tribute is a terrible artist. If only people would open their eyes to the reality of the whole situation.


I agree with your take, that's good advice. Better to be known and working than unknown and protected.

And so folks don't for a moment think this is to protect and defend your "indie band". This is all about corporate money and taxes. Not protecting the artist. For those with something to protect, send your tunes in for copyright protection. It doesn't cost that much. What costs is your lawyer trying to make it stick in court. Governments and corporations are built on liars. Oh, I meant lawyers but my backspace is out of commission. In the end lawyers will be the only "artists" that benefit from this "piracy crackdown".



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

Without this process Metallica would have never gotten a loyal and active local following and they might never have made it out of a very competitive local music scene.

Anti piracy laws, if enforced won't help the established bands to get that much more money but it will make it way more difficult for up and coming bands to develop a fan base.

At least that's what I think.


That's a great example, I thought of the Metallica vs Napster deal too. Consider too that the "Silver Beatles" in their Cavern Club days were likely not paying royalties to the blues, R&B and skiffle artists for the tunes they were covering. Do you think Sir Faul went back and made amends? I imagine that the frenzy those cover tunes created was worth a chunk of change considering the outcome.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by DINSTAAR
It pains me as a strong proponent for nonviolence to point out the glaring reality of intellectual property.

"Intellectual Property" can only be protected through the initiation of violence. IP, itself, is a violent ideology. The reason it takes more laws and regs to police this is because without the legalized right to bully the consumer, the music industry, film industry, and science itself would not exist as it does at present. The RIAA and MPAA are fascist organizations whose goal it is to maintain a monopoly of culture in a time when (through Internet and other technologies) culture is becoming a more separated, more accessible, and more specialized than ever before. Science is evolving much the same way.

IP is just a remnant of an old ideology that only a select few can know certain things without recourse. The printing press changed the world forever.... the Internet is infinitely more revolutionary than the press. Imagine what medical and technological breakthroughs have been put off or put away because of the threat of an IP based lawsuit.

Now they are trying to find more nonviolent victims for their crusade to stay in power.

'Piracy' as it is called, is not even piracy at all. The only ones acting like pirates are those jumping in other peoples ships, swords drawn, and demanding tribute.

The only thing we can really count on, as peaceful dissenters, is the inefficiency of government. I am not too worried at the moment.


Yet the entirety of free market principles rest squarely on the notion of work and reward.

If taxation is theft, which occurs without any defense

Then so is the theft of ones work and the value which that work represents

My band spend $35,000 to record and produce a record, OUR MONEY, OUR TIME-

No different than a factory owner investing in his business

However our work was - taken and used to generate profits for others in ten country
by the end of the first day of release.

However you make a distinction that one is violent and the other is not, while both deprive the rightful owner to the fruits of their labor.

To see this unprincipled deviation in the core of your typically steadfast principle
is confusing and appears to by a contrary addition to your across the board views.

Kind of like adding a propeller to a submarine because it looks so cool



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 06:38 PM
link   
This is war.

HACK THE PLANET!



new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join