The Pirate Bay to Fly 'Server Drones' to Avoid Law Enforcement

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3

Originally posted by VonDoomen
just because someone downloaded something doesnt mean they would have bought it if that was their only option.

I won't buy a Ferrari, but if I just took one, it's still stealing. Your logic is flawed.

Yes that would be stealing.

If i walked into an art gallery and took a photo of a piece of art, would that be me stealing it? Effectively i would have made a copy, the artist still owns his/her original artwork and no loss has been made.

The same could be said for when handheld scanners start appearing for use by 3D printers, what if i scanned a ferrari on the street and effectively cloned it using a 3D printer? That's not stealing, the original owner hasn't lost anything.

Not saying i condone all aspects of piracy. But in the event there is a band i like, i will go see them live and purchase a CD from the merch stall (cheaper, and the band gets most of the payment), big name record labels don't deserve the cuts they get.

Capitalism is a joke.

reply to post by InsideYourMind

You wouldn't be stealing it from the "owner" of the car, but you would be stealing it from the engineers, and investors at Ferrari who spent millions developing it, expecting a return on investment. Ultimately, if everyone did it, Ferrari would go out of business, because they'd only sell 1 car, and everyone would simply copy it. Everyone loses.

I hate the record labels too, however, you're still taking BMI payments away from songwriters and artists. Period. It's a fact, regardless of how you try to justify it. People who shoplift food for their starving families justify their theft too, so I guess this is a case of "it is what it is".

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
reply to post by InsideYourMind

 

If you don't buy the CD, then BMI doesn't pay the artist. It's theft. My dad recorded with Capital in the late 50's, and still gets a check (a couple dollars is all) from time to time. However, if someone copies it, he won't get paid, therefore it's theft.

That statement is about as silly as copyrighting sound wave patterns.

Oh wait...

Your missing the point! (only read the first page or so)

This will go along way towards an open and free internet.

Just think, the people in China and North Korea (ok that might be a jump) could access servers directly without the government getting involved (although they could shoot it down). This would be awesome for freedom of speech.

reply to post by navy_vet_stg3


You logic is flawed as well because in this circumstance, we would have had to use a 3d printer to make a copy of the ferrari. No ones stealing the original copy. so nyah

No ones going to pay $20 for some band they've never heard of. ever think of that?

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Just because someone makes a cd doesnt mean their destined or guaranteed to be successful in this market.

No ones going to fork over 25$ on a cd for a band theyve never heard of or listened too..

so they either need to make better music or work harder. or do the smart thing and not waste money on printing cd's and release it on a free online label.

but yea back to my point, everythings a risk, they are not guaranteed a profit in our system,

Originally posted by WhatAreThey
That statement is about as silly as copyrighting sound wave patterns.

Oh wait...

What's silly about it? That's how they get paid. You don't write a song, or produce a song, and then give it away. It's the same as books, or any other thing that involves one's labor. They deserve to be paid for it. If you wrote a book, wouldn't you expect to be paid for it? If you write code, do you expect your company to pay you for your time and effort? Or, are you one of these people that thinks everything should be free. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"?

Originally posted by VonDoomen
reply to post by navy_vet_stg3

 

You logic is flawed as well because in this circumstance, we would have had to use a 3d printer to make a copy of the ferrari. No ones stealing the original copy. so nyah

No ones going to pay $20 for some band they've never heard of. ever think of that?

So, you expect Ferrari to develop cars for free so you can use a 3D printer to copy their product?

Of course nobody is going to pay $20 for some band they've never heard of. But, if you like AC/DC or Metallica, then why won't you pay for their music, if you're listening to it?

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3

Originally posted by WhatAreThey
That statement is about as silly as copyrighting sound wave patterns.

Oh wait...

What's silly about it? That's how they get paid. You don't write a song, or produce a song, and then give it away. It's the same as books, or any other thing that involves one's labor. They deserve to be paid for it. If you wrote a book, wouldn't you expect to be paid for it? If you write code, do you expect your company to pay you for your time and effort? Or, are you one of these people that thinks everything should be free. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"?

It's silly because under that logic, it's also piracy if you simply give away a CD. The person you are giving to it is using it without having had paid the artist. The same goes for a picture in a museum. You effectively make a copy of it when you take a high resolution photograph. You can blow it up and print it out/frame it.

That's making a copy. The artist didn't get paid.

Is that piracy?

The problem with the media piracy is the original concept of media copy as a method to maximize the profit per unit of labor. Mechanized or even digital replication is the most effective way to achieve it. It haven't been the media pirates who invented the compact disk, video cassette or even book print.

On the other side, try to think of an alternative reality where only live performances exist like concerts, theater or circus. This would be a serious backslash to the human civilization. Thus there must be a way to spread content efficiently. I think we have it now with the Internet.

But there also has to be a motivation for content creators to create and share. Creating high quality content can be expensive(labor costs). I think the whole i-tunes, steam and co are a start. Ideally though the middleman should be removed/reduced. There should be independent platforms where content providers(music, film, game, book) are getting the money directly while paying a fee for the advertisement and distribution costs per sold copy(a few percent of the price). Even the funding for projects can be accomplished completely by such platforms leveraging crowdfunding.

And this is where the future is heading in my opinion. See kickstarter as an example! A video games project raised $3,336,371 recently: www.kickstarter.com...

But Pirate Bay by any means is not such a platform. As it is focused on sharing only, it doesn't facilitate the creation of new content! And this makes it wrong, morally at least.

IMHO

Originally posted by WhatAreThey
It's silly because under that logic, it's also piracy if you simply give away a CD. The person you are giving to it is using it without having had paid the artist.

No, but you paid for that usage, and transferred the ownership when you gave it away. If you copied the CD for your friend, then it would be piracy/theft.

Originally posted by WhatAreTheyThe same goes for a picture in a museum. You effectively make a copy of it when you take a high resolution photograph. You can blow it up and print it out/frame it.

Depends on the medium of the original picture. It it's an oil painting, then, no, because you have a photo of an oil painting. A "print" of the Mona Lisa isn't worth the price of the Mona Lisa, nor is it equal in any way. If, however, you managed to photograph a photographer's photo and do that, they would be within their rights to demand payment.

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
I think it's funny that they'd spend so much money to steal something that they could probably buy for less.

I think it's a pretty neat idea though, but there comes a point where spending this much money to protect stolen goods is a wash.

The ignorance of some people is truly frightening. You do know that torrents are used to transfer open source software among other things, as well, yes? Blizzard Entertainment also use torrents as a means of getting patches for World of Warcraft out to players.

It's not just used for piracy at all.

reply to post by petrus4

Fair enough. I doubt, however, the police are looking for open source torrents, or updates from Blizzard. Nor, do I think they'd be trying to run servers on drones if that's all that torrents had. So, the only reason why they're using drones is because of the illegal activity. Thus, spending money to steal something, which was my original point.

reply to post by InsideYourMind


It is THEFT. It doesn't matter how many cute little cartoons you use to illustrate it. You are depriving the copyright owner from being able to make a living on his intellectual property.

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
I think it's funny that they'd spend so much money to steal something that they could probably buy for less.

I think it's a pretty neat idea though, but there comes a point where spending this much money to protect stolen goods is a wash.

Maybe they do make money. Does the site run ads?

I can sympathise with the owners of intellectual property, who feel cheated. But look at a country like America. More than half the population is living under the poverty line, 12 hour days 6 days a week are becoming the new normal. If Online Piracy ends, then many people still wont have the time and money to create significant jump in profits if piracy is shut down.

The auto industry has seen a decrease in sales, so did about any other industry many even more so than the entertainment industry, which had its greatest box office hit in the midst of a recession (Avatar) and it isnt because people downloaded a chevy.

And I wasnt standing in line to see transformers (okay I saw 2 due to peer pressure) and i am not exactly looking forward to bays TMHT either or Battleship. I buy and keep buying media and going to the cinema. I am sure people who have money do so too. If people stop torrenting, they do not necessarily have the time and money to go to the cinema.

Truly sick and tired of billionaire artists crying about a few thousand dollars in cd sales. Most of artists money comes from concerts, not album sales.

Sure I can put myself in the artists shoes, but what I will tell you is after making millions in concert sales, I'm not going to give two #%$@s about missing out on a cd sale.

This isn't even touching technicalities. Did you know when you download via a torrent, or aren't downloading the music as one entire file. you're downloading bits of information at a time that reassemble themselves into the file. So technically, no one is downloading anything but information. When the file is done, they may have a music file, but that doesn't mean anything, they are merely a "potential listener"

Lately I've been torrenting books to fill my e-reader. I fail to see how this is any different than going to a library. Are libraries pirates? THey enable me to read books without paying for it.

Originally posted by The Cusp
Lately I've been torrenting books to fill my e-reader. I fail to see how this is any different than going to a library. Are libraries pirates? THey enable me to read books without paying for it.

Library buys book. You check book out for free and read it. You return book. Next guy checks out book, etc.

Someone buys CD and rips it, adds it to his torrent folder. Thousands grab it instantly, never returning their copy.

Yeah, it's different.

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
reply to post by InsideYourMind

 

If you don't buy the CD, then BMI doesn't pay the artist. It's theft. My dad recorded with Capital in the late 50's, and still gets a check (a couple dollars is all) from time to time. However, if someone copies it, he won't get paid, therefore it's theft.

What's the real theft, the fact your dad won't get a couple dollars, or the fact that is all he gets. Artists make money from tours, not albums. Real theft is the labels.

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
I think it's funny that they'd spend so much money to steal something that they could probably buy for less.

I think it's a pretty neat idea though, but there comes a point where spending this much money to protect stolen goods is a wash.

Stealing? The vast majority of things available for download on torrent sites is public domain. Downloading torrents does not automatically equal stealing. I get tons of wonderful things via torrents that are otherwise hard to find and yet not one of them is stolen.

ETA: People defending theft here are doing more damage than harm. If any of the artwork I take the time and effort to produce is used or enjoyed in any way by anyone not compensating me financially or otherwise is stealing from me whether I keep the original or not.