reply to post by thisguyrighthere
Regarding the corn, that is a set finite product. The material and time that went into producing that box of corn is gone. It will take more material
and time to produce corn to replace what you have sampled. Digital media doesnt expend the same material and time. If anything the material, being
storage space, and the time, being transfer rate, belong to the downloader. Making the local digital material more a product of the downloader than
the publisher or even the file hoster at that point.
Make no mistakes about it, when songs were being sold on vinyl records, it was not the actual material that went into making vinyl records that was
being purchased, it was the songs recorded onto that vinyl that was being purchased. The raw materials that went into making the vinyl record are
much like how you describe corn. Digital has nothing to do with it. In the world of vinyl recordings, the songs being sold have the same mystical
powers you ascribe to them in the digital age. What you are arguing is that technology has facilitated plunder, thus plunder is "legal".
Further, it is arguable that those who purchased vinyl records of their favorite recording artists, and upon taking that vinyl record home, the
material, the storage space, time it took to purchase the record and all the time it takes to take the record out of its sleeve and put it on a turn
table and finally placing the needle of that turntable on the record, which makes that product one belonging to the purchaser. Hey! How about that!
See how that works? Everything you just described, only difference is that in the scenario I presented someone actually made a purchase of music, and
in your scenario someone plundered for it.
That corn which you had no intention of buying yet ate perhaps would not have been sold but at least it could have been sold until you sampled from
That movie you downloaded is having a harder time reaching actual customers because people like you not only plunder the movie, you then use internet
forums as a place to recruit more pirates to help you plunder. Perhaps, if you never plundered that movie you downloaded but only watched half, it
never would have been seen buy actual paying customers, but because you and others like you do plunder, and then write propaganda pieces for
recruiting more thieves, the makers of that movie will sell less tickets and DVD's than they would have without you and your band of pirates gleeful
I dont think harboring a fugitive or standing idly by during an assault quite equate to media sharing.
Let's be clear here. If you make a little film and want to get that film to the largest audience possible without regard for any profit or recoup of
expense, then using the digital technology as a method of "media sharing" is perfectly lawful. Downloading, on the other hand, someone's pirated
version of a the most recent Clint Eastwood movie is not "media sharing", it is theft. At best, it is aiding and abetting thieves. Either way, it
Maybe downloading media is extending the crime if the source of the media is criminal but wouldnt "first-sale" negate that?
The First Sale doctrine protects those individuals who are selling used copies of any copyrighted products they've purchased. If you buy (as in
actually spend money and purchase the product) a book from a book store and years later sell that book, the First Sale doctrine relieves you of any
obligation to honor the copyright on that book. The first sale satisfied that copyright, and any subsequent sales - or even loaning or giving that
product away - are free and clear of copyright law. However, it is one thing to give a friend your copy of the new Lady Gaga album that you
purchased. It is another thing entirely to post the songs of that album digitally on the internet providing a download feature that allows millions
to have your purchased copy of that song.
The label that put out the most recent Lady Gaga album has a distribution department hard at work at selling as many copies of Lady Gaga's new album
as they can. You are not a part of their distribution department and are harming them by posting your copy of Lady Gaga's new album to be downloaded
for free. You are sabotaging that labels efforts in the name of plunder.
If I buy a CD and I decide to rip it to a hard drive and share it isnt that my first-sale prerogative?
No. You have not purchased any license to record the copy you purchased and repackage it and distribute it yourself, and this is not what the First
Sale doctrine applies to. If you want to give the very same copy of the CD you purchased, you have the right to do so. If you want to sell that
specific copy you purchased, you have the right to do so.