Denying Ignorance about Copyright

Originally posted by aeonminder
As both a graphic designer and a musician

...

In essence, what you're saying is that if you invented a new way to dig holes

Ah, I see what your saying. Basically, you need to feel better than me so you start with a "me" post, "Hi everybody on the internet I'm a < insert here > and you must be a < insert here > and that means I'm better than you because I just proclaimed that you dig holes and know nothing about copyright law".

Yea... sure... you and every other armchair < insert here > on the internet.

By the way, I'm a USAF veteran and I even used to be a pilot (at age 16). Also, I've dug a few holes in my life.

reply to post by RSF77

Okay, so copyright law is necessary.

How do we stop it from being abused?

How exactly is copyright law abused? All it does is certify authorship and deter anyone from claiming other people's material.

An individual should never have to set foot in any jail, anywhere for downloading a song.

I do think jail for downloading music is a bit excessive, but from the legal perspective illegally downloading a song is tantamount to stealing an album from a shop, or stealing a car. The sentencing is probably measured against the fixed price of whatever is stolen.

If I actually want or love an album, I'll buy it. Too bad for me, but that's our system.

Anyway, I've seen countless people here in the UK get off with stealing DVDs, I doubt a magistrate would sentence someone to jail time for downloading one song.

Also, how do we determine the "worth" of the information released to the public so that wealth doesn't trump common sense or someones freedom, financial or otherwise?

You're not making any sense. Do you mean what is it worth in monetary terms or philosophical terms? If its the latter, you'll never reach an objective conclusion covering all forms of intellectual property. That is an enormous blanket term.

Financially speaking, what is a MacBook or a hammer worth? Whatever price tags are attached. Same thing whether its a book, an ebook, an album or an mp3. Producing these things requires resources and labour.

No matter what, a writer has the right to lay claim to their own work. Your argument is that basically, intellectual property isn't worth anything. You're not making any sense. Why should a scientist be allowed to patent their work and not a songwriter? Why should an inventor be allowed and not an author?

With regards to information itself, if it is an article citing known facts, the facts themselves are not protected. The ways in which they are selected, arranged and presented are.

If the market determines that worth, and nobody wants to buy it because it's available for download that would seem to hint at the fact that it isn't worth buying.

Many people would steal jewellery or cars rather than buy them, given the option. What's your point?

Copyright law is being abused, I say remove copyright law until you can get it right. The motivation for all copyright claims is greed, if you like it or not.

No. The motivation for copyright claims is making sure you don't get ripped off. It is self-preservation. It's not a way of bragging "look at me everyone, look at this amazing achievement of mine - look at the name, that's right it's me".

Speaking from my own experience, I put myself through a lot for my music. Even if I work until midnight, I will put in the time writing and learning songs and get 3/4 hours sleep. I've never earned a thing off any of my music, but I still copyright my songs. Why should someone who hasn't put in any effort get the credit?

I don't think the government should facilitate greed.

So the government should facilitate theft? It's easy to condemn that which you do not have any understanding of. This post is akin to me starting a thread and saying "Where do these doctors get off charging money? They should want to heal people for free, stupid doctors." Or having a go at unions.

reply to post by RSF77

Ah, I see what your saying. Basically, you need to feel better than me so you start with a "me" post, "Hi everybody on the internet I'm a < insert here > and you must be a < insert here > and that means I'm better than you because I just proclaimed that you dig holes and know nothing about copyright law".

No, he was presenting the view of someone who makes a living off intellectual property, which you should welcome into your debate.

And wow, he didn't say you dig holes. I guess that metaphor went totally over your head.

By the way, I'm a USAF veteran and I even used to be a pilot (at age 16).

Aha! So what if someone said "that's a totally useless job and that you should've done it for free anyway. Being paid for that is greedy"?

Originally posted by arollingstone
And wow, he didn't say you dig holes. I guess that metaphor went totally over your head.

Regardless, don't be laughing and thinking its a joke to make fun of people who get less fortunate jobs in society. These people are the backbone of how we live, so respect that.

I know a dude that hauls trash and makes over 100K annual. Me feel sorry for him? How about he gets the next round. I dont want people going to jail for like half of what they do go to jail for. It is the worst place for them to actually stop doing bad things. I DO think they are wrong, the punishments however in our world need to be more appropriate.

My parents made me write 500 sentences when I screwed up big as a kid. I never do those things now as a result. That was like hours of something I really hated but didnt really harm me, not the same as jail.

reply to post by petrus4

I hear you. I was under the impression that what I author in this forum was in fact copyrighted by ATS. I was wrong! Everyone remember this thread?
Were Humans Created by Reptilians?
Well, one day doing research, I stumbled onto this:
Post subject: Were Humans Created by Reptilians
I brought this to the attention of Springer, but the post still stands. So, copyrights? What in hell are those? I think I will just ignore them from now on.

reply to post by jollyjollyjolly


Wow, you read alot into my post that you didn't need to.

To clarify, if you are not the owner of "the company" and you are working for "the company", your ideas are their ideas. A company hires to make money. It may make money off of your ideas. They provided the tools for which you used to inspire yourself and create for them. You get payed because they made money from your idea. That is pretty plain and simple. That is how my job as a designer works (engineer).

A farmer can keep what he grows or he can sell it. He is the owner.

My "Ding Ding Ding" was in agreement with your post.

reply to post by RSF77


Man I really can't tell if you're just trolling or not, perhaps inadvertently so.

Regardless, don't be laughing and thinking its a joke to make fun of people who get less fortunate jobs in society. These people are the backbone of how we live, so respect that.

Nobody laughed at anyone. Nobody made fun of anyone. You are the one who created a thread trying to devalidate creative, intellectual and academic trades, the backbone of civilisation. That other poster used digging as an example of more physical labour and didn't make fun of it at all. He legitimately used it as a comparison.

I take it you have no mature response to my other comments.

You know, I'm still waiting for one thread...just one, on this forum...where someone can point out one of the ways in which government or corporations are screwing everyone, without having said thread immediately invaded by a group of aggressive, cowardly, brainwashed trolls, who act as apologists for the government or corporate position, and attack the OP for daring to be concerned about the public's wellbeing.

"How dare you? We love Big Brother!"

There are people in this thread who are nothing but quislings and traitors to humanity.

reply to post by petrus4

You know, I'm still waiting for one thread...just one, on this forum...where someone can point out one of the ways in which government or corporations are screwing everyone, without having said thread immediately invaded by a group of aggressive, cowardly, brainwashed trolls, who act as apologists for the government or corporate position, and attack the OP for daring to be concerned about the public's wellbeing.

There's plenty of them, but those ones actually have valid points to make. This one doesn't. It is an insult to intellectualism, creativity and academia.

Nobody 'attacked' you either.

Everyone who debated against you spoke either as artists or writers or with sympathy for artists and writers, employing simple logic to pick apart your arguments. Nobody mentioned the government or 'corporate position'. I did however explained the legal position earlier.

Everyone can draw caricatures of their opponents: "Omg copyright is so greedy, anyone who wants copyright is just greedy theres no need. It is true because this website I found says so and if anyone argues well you're just NWO puppets and sheeple."

There is no merit in your original post, so I debunked it. As did others. Deal with it. The motto is "Deny Ignorance". If to you that equates to "NWO stooge" that's your problem.

"How dare you? We love Big Brother!"

There are people in this thread who are nothing but quislings and traitors to humanity.

Wow, that's really mature - you lose an argument on the points so you start calling everyone names and launching into melodramatic tirades about Big Brother. This has absolutely nothing to do with Big Brother or the NWO.

You're saying individuals shouldn't be able to legally protect their work, and I contend that is a ridiculous statement. You want to access films, music and literature for free? Bye bye film, music and literature.

Unfortunately that isn't how capitalism works. Your stance is the one that is indefensible.

Not every law is unethical just because its been implemented by the government. You anti-copyright guys have no case whatsoever.

I hereby find the defendant, "Mr. Copyright Protection" non-guilty. Court is adjourned.

I think we need to keep this thread going. Despite the predictable onslaught of trolls, which has already occurred, I can remain hopeful that a few people are exposed to the article in the OP.

I want to comment again, in light of that, however, just what utter and complete traitors to humanity I consider many members of the American military in particular to be.

I have noticed that whenever any attention is drawn to, or resistance made against the myriad ways in which the corporate world are threatening the continued existence of life in general, it seems to be the troops, more than any other group, who will reflexively spew enraged, belligerent mind control in said corporations' defense, at anyone whose thinking dares deviate from official lines.

You are a disgrace, and you make me sick.

reply to post by petrus4


Man you're funny. You desperately want to keep your thread going, yet you have so fair far failed to address a single point I've made so far, let alone what others have pointed out.

I think we need to keep this thread going. Despite the predictable onslaught of trolls, which has already occurred, I can remain hopeful that a few people are exposed to the article in the OP.

They're not trolls, they're intellectuals. Just because someone disagrees with you, it doesn't make them a troll. If anything, the nature of your argument predisposes you to the troll's position. Plus, you insult people and try to condescend them rather than address their legitimate points.

I mean really, who posts "Come on guys lets keep this thread going" on their own thread? You want some more stars and flags? I'll give you them if you want, here you go. But you're still wrong.

I want to comment again, in light of that, however, just what utter and complete traitors to humanity I consider many members of the American military in particular to be.

Yeah, how dare they put their lives on the line for their country? I may not agree with imperialist foreign policies, but I'm not going to have a go at soldiers themselves.

I have noticed that whenever any attention is drawn to, or resistance made against the myriad ways in which the corporate world are threatening the continued existence of life in general, it seems to be the troops, more than any other group, who will reflexively spew enraged, belligerent mind control in said corporations' defense, at anyone whose thinking dares deviate from official lines.

I disagreed with you. I am neither American nor in the military. Nobody arguing against you has defended corporations, they have defended individuals who make a living off their intellectual property. In fact, the overall consensus was that corporations should not be able to claim other people's work.

If anything, you're just trying to spin the discussion into something its not. The only place it is an NWO or illuminati issue is in your own head. It isn't about that and you're clearly way out of your depth here and your stance is extremely immature.

"EVERYONE WHO ISAGREEZ IZ BRAINWASHED BY THA CORPORASHUNS, UR JUST A SLAVE, UR A TROLL" - real sophisticated.

You are a disgrace, and you make me sick.

Lovely.

Thank you for posting this information. I found the following to be particularly illuminating:

Their charter gave them not only exclusive right to print, but also the right to search out and confiscate unauthorized presses and books, and even to burn illegally printed books. No book could be printed until it was entered in the company's Register, and no work could be added to the Register until it had passed the crown's censor, or had been self-censored by the Stationers. The Company of Stationers became, in effect, the government's private, for-profit information police force [1].

"...until it had passed the crown's censor..."

This ties in nicely with the Dan Rather interview this past weekend. Who knew the MSM was just fancy-schmancy talk for something as patrician as the crown's censor?

I remember an important theme repeated throughout my college art history days: commission. It was the first time I'd heard that word used where it didn't pertain to one party receiving a fraction of profits from a second party. People wanted art because it's a celebration of the human imagination - they will always want it. When they don't get it, they make it themselves or commission it.

I think writes as copy, ancillary, distribution, and the use of forms is sufficient.
Downloading programs, entertainment, music, etc. should come at a price, (excluding trial versions or excerpts)

yet, I also believe that the sale of IP should include complete satisfaction od same.

Any GOOD product, whether material or intellectual ought to have a double-your-money-back guarantee.
(not talking trinkets, bling-bling or novelty and throw-away/disposable items.

Say you buy a CD/DVD and it fails due to some cyclic-redundancy or such.
Should you have to purchase another?
What if I thought I would buy a remastered digital version of an album originally only released on vinyl.
And I didn't like it?

Double my money back.

The value, whether real, entertainment or knowledge-based would then be evident.

People, for the most part, adhere to a code when it comes to value. The code is different for everyone and the only proof of value would be which productions, ideas, inventions elevate and which go bankrupt funding the guarantee.