Anonymous - Operation Pirate Bay

page: 2
39
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   
As much as I enjoy reading on my tablet, my first love was the paperback book.




posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 07:07 PM
link   
I think I see where this is going. It's the internet so people can do what they want without much fear of reprisal. I see it this way. If you go to a book store and take a book without paying. Then you are stealing and if caught your in trouble. The internet makes being a bully/arse/and yes even a Thief easy. My personal opinion is this. If you would not go into a Music store and take something without purchasing it because it would be theft. Then doing so over the internet is the same thing. The difference is your chance of being caught. If your not brave enough to curse a relative stranger on the street because your chance of losing a fight is 50/50 then you shouldn't do it on the internet. People do it because they do not fear the reprecusions.
Its actually amusing when you think about it. You only do these things here because you can get away. And you can explain away doing it. You can come up with some Lie and actually start believing it. If you don't cuss off the internet don't do it on the internet. If you don't go around purposely hating on people out loud with the very real possibuility of reprisal, Then don't do it on the internet. The Internet may seem like a free pass to do all of this. That's why people say it's not hard to be brave online.. Just my 2 cents Stealing is stealing no matter why or how its done.
Therian



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
reply to post by minkmouse
 


File sharing is not true piracy. These are people sharing their own copies of a product, that's all it is.

The companies can't claim money on it so they have to make stuff up and make it seem like a bad thing so they can force consumers to buy their product and get richer.

And to top it off, most of that money is not going to the artists, it's going to the lawyers and the people who own the rights to the works.

edit on 3-10-2012 by EvilSadamClone because: (no reason given)


Sorry, but your argument is false.

Sharing something with a friend is one thing, copying it and distributing it to complete strangers over the internet is a different thing completely.

Would you also think it's acceptable to copy CD's and go to a market and just hand out hundreds of copies of someone's work, without their permission?

This is no different to you just randomly copying someone's product and giving it away, thereby affecting sales of that item, and then affecting the creators ability to create future work.

The idea that this is just someone sharing something with a friend is a BS excuse, a weak attempt to excuse it. I accept that the industry needs to change, and that the ridiculous profits they have come to expect should be a thing of the past, but lame excuses do not remove the fact that people sharing products on the internet for thousands of others to download for free is a breach of intellectual property rights.

I know several small bands, and even they have people copying and sharing their work. They are not with any labels, no corporations backing them and making obscene profits. People are stealing from artists, denying them a living.

And to make it worse, sites are making a PROFIT off of this theft too! As if it's not arrogant enough to think you can just give away something someone has created for nothing, people think they have a right to make money from that too!

Sorry if this offends, but tough! People using sites like that are scroungers, believing they have a "right" to whatever they want for absolutely nothing, and damn the consequences for the people who actually invest time and money to create it.

The most sickening part of it all is the belief that this is some kind of moral thing, like people are "sticking it to the man" and robbing a corporation of some of those obscene profits - at the same time they ignore the fact that they are allowing someone running a site to make hundreds of thousands of $'s (in some cases millions) for nothing more than giving away someone's work!

How is that moral?

It really is pathetic, and extremely disappointing.

I have supported Anon since the protests against $cientology started, but in the last year I've seen people who call themselves Anon taking down random sites for "lulz" (one of mine was defaced by a guy in a group of hundreds of hackers who associate themselves with Anon), and I've seen them switch from genuine targets worthy of attack to this hissy fit.

They've lost my respect, lost my support, and my interest.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   
I too believe we need to stand up against the ability to lay claims on ownership of a copy. Since we are heading in medical directions that eventually could lead to cloning, and such, whos to say someone can't create a clone of you, name it something else, but it looks like you. But they own it, and create the next Beiber with it, then what?

I know it's far fetched, but also think of the implications of ownership of a copy, I make a music track, and it took me maybe 2 days to a week, I should make money off that time it took and my creative process, ok understood. But should I continue to make money off that same track over and over and over, endlessly right? Now multiple that by thousands, and you have the poor record companies and movie companies making money over and over and over again, endlessly it seems.

That seems like a great way to mess up an economy. The production of a one time item, that continues to make money off copies of itself. Specially in the digital age, it's only a matter harddrive space and processor speed that limits profit, not talent, not true creative process ( the need to constantly come up with new material ), selling copies means sooner or later people wont have to try as hard, they can just sell copies. This goes with anything digital and really should concern you, whole empires have been making millions off virtually nothing.

Yes I should own the rights to something I make, but I don't think I should be able to make endless amounts of money off endless amounts of copies, yes also competitive market place will drive more better versions, but for songs, movies, and artwork, it's kinda a economic bad issue In my opinion.

I was in a band, I have friends who still tour from their high school band, and guess what, you won't make it solely due to the amount of music that is out there, you can make it to the point of playing bars and clubs, but music and movies isn't anything more than a popularity market, afraid to say, its no longer about talent, just about appealing to sensations. Now a days, it's about how many views you get, how passed around your content is, that makes or breaks you. Now if the internet is censored, the music and movie industry goes from everyone being able to pass around the content and exposing unnamed people, and gaining a following of people who will buy anything you make, to a world where you have to file a petition to upload content, where you have to register your content with a patent office before you can even give it to another person.

There is something to be said about this all from both sides, but I stand firmly on the creative process side.

The post under me has it right, if people solely owned the rights, people would see it more as supporting them, rather then some no faced entity, as well once that said person dies, the rights are open for public use? or would it become property handed down like coins and other such inheritance.
edit on 3-10-2012 by Moneyisgodlifeisrented because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   
The real solution is easy.

Only a human being (Oh, OK, include aliens then!) should be capable of owning copy rights. It is people that create things. It is the human mind that has the creative juices.

A company can create nothing. A company has never created anything! This would solve these problems.

Somrtimes solutions are simple!

P



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Therian
 


If they stuck with cassette tapes n VHS this wouldn't be an issue...



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


Anonymous hasn't done squat since their leader got busted by the FBI and offered the deal of working for the government for the rest of his life and ratting on his pals or sitting in prison till he's 500 years old. So the others aren't doing anything but laying low.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 07:53 PM
link   
Intellectual property.


Anyone who creates anything should be glad someone takes an interest in something they create. Let alone the fact their work becomes a part of humanity for the enjoyment of everyone. Passed on generation to generation.

I know it doesn't pay the bills, but to know your work will live on forever has to count for something right?
edit on 3-10-2012 by cconn487 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 


I agree with you on a lot of topics and respect your writing style, but am not in total agreement with you on this one subject. Forgive me for not addressing your whole post but I believe that the point of it was morality as you asked if it was a moral thing to do.

I'm not trying to compare apples to oranges here, but is this moral?

Copyright board to charge for music at weddings, parades

My question is where do we draw the line on what is acceptable and unacceptable?

I understand your point and where you are coming from, especially the part about morality, but the financial enslavement that these industries are a part of are not very moral, and deserve no pity from me. The independent artists are the ones who lose out in all this, and do receive sympathy from me. If you are not part of the industry you can barely scrape a living so these smaller non pop culture groups are the victim.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   
I love pirate bay... I share LOTS of things.. mainly manuals and schematics for different goodies. Ive never shared copyrighted material as I am really undecided on things. I mean I give what I do myself free.. I dont really care and sharing info really does us all good. Probably good this "property" thing wasnt enforced back in the day when we had double deck cassettes. Be a lot of forlorn teens still in prison for those terrible love-song-to-get-in-her-or-his-shorts mix tapes and sharing of them. DO we also stop folks from putting their old VHS tapes and DVDs in the ol yard sale under penalty of death?


However.. books. Im a book and reading FIEND. I love my real books but also have an unhealthy attachment to my Fire... which I hacked to android and put kindle for android on it.
MANY ebooks even through amazon are NOT formatted correctly for even their own product.. irks me. If I get a bad book off of PB I 9 times out of 10 buy the hard copy to put in my library if it happens to be a decent book. Some of the authors I get off of Amazon are new ones.. self published. Is a spell check and a few bucks for your high schooler to proof read it too hard to do??



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by cconn487
Intellectual property.


Anyone who creates anything should be glad someone takes an interest in something they create. Let alone the fact their work becomes a part of humanity for the enjoyment of everyone. Passed on generation to generation.

I know it doesn't pay the bills, but to know your work will live on forever has to count for something right?
edit on 3-10-2012 by cconn487 because: (no reason given)


You mustve stumbled upon some of my old home made instructional films concerning the salvaged material homebrew construction of rocket stoves and playing int he mud making dakota holes, things that shoot projectiles and all manner of things folks dont give 2 damns about. I think they were only DL cause Im female. Maybe my clothes would catch on fire and a boob would show or something.... that whole line of thinking.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


I agree with you. I think the industry needs to change and I starred the post above suggesting that all rights should remain with the artist, who then makes an agreement to provide the business with a %.

I don't disagree with the statement about morality. However, pointing to one and saying that's immoral too does not remove the responsibility of others.

The arguments I keep seeing are hypocritical. People who use these sites say several things to excuse their actions while ignoring the hypocrisy they are participating in. They cannot claim it's immoral that companies make most of the money, while using a site that profits from their actions too. I would rather support a company making a profit in agreement with the artist than support a site making money from giving away other peoples work.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by cconn487
Intellectual property.


Anyone who creates anything should be glad someone takes an interest in something they create. Let alone the fact their work becomes a part of humanity for the enjoyment of everyone. Passed on generation to generation.

I know it doesn't pay the bills, but to know your work will live on forever has to count for something right?
edit on 3-10-2012 by cconn487 because: (no reason given)


Are you seriously saying that people should be happy if their art is worth stealing?

Right, so by your logic someone should create things for you to enjoy, and you should give nothing back at all, they should just be happy that you took it...

Hey, I like your TV. Maybe I'll come over later and help myself to it. Don't get mad though, you should just be happy that you had something I wanted. Think of all the enjoyment I'll get out of it! That's enough for you right? The knowledge that the thing I took from you brings me happiness is all the reward you should ever need.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 


Well you have me there.

I can't argue with that


Morality is difficult to define and many of us (including I) are being hypocrites when we think we are doing the "moral" thing.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 08:26 PM
link   
I stopped buying music the moment I bought a CD with 15 songs on it, but only maybe 2 were good.

Why would I wanna buy an entire CD with crap music for 20$ when all I want is a couple songs?



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by detachedindividual

Originally posted by cconn487
Intellectual property.


Anyone who creates anything should be glad someone takes an interest in something they create. Let alone the fact their work becomes a part of humanity for the enjoyment of everyone. Passed on generation to generation.

I know it doesn't pay the bills, but to know your work will live on forever has to count for something right?
edit on 3-10-2012 by cconn487 because: (no reason given)


Are you seriously saying that people should be happy if their art is worth stealing?

Right, so by your logic someone should create things for you to enjoy, and you should give nothing back at all, they should just be happy that you took it...

Hey, I like your TV. Maybe I'll come over later and help myself to it. Don't get mad though, you should just be happy that you had something I wanted. Think of all the enjoyment I'll get out of it! That's enough for you right? The knowledge that the thing I took from you brings me happiness is all the reward you should ever need.


For physical items, yes I would agree with you. Digital representations of work, the 1s and 0s that show up on a screen, and stored on a hard drive and exist purely as data that can be replicated with little to no labor I just don't see as having a monetary value.

Thats just me personally.

Nobody owns the rights to 1s and 0s. If someone did, they would be the richest person on the planet. Thats basically all the pirate bay, and other sites like it are providing. Not physical copies.
edit on 3-10-2012 by cconn487 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 08:34 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 08:35 PM
link   
The problem really is capitalism and money.
We should enjoy the music for music and not worry about money since it has no relation really to the creative process, yet is one of the most determining factors in it now a days.

If things are only made to sell, then you can only imagine our future.

What I want to point out is that, if the human race doesn't start working with each other and always against in this competitive fashion, then not much will change in regards to this and other matters. Money is the main reason we even are talking about this, and money doesn't have a place here imo. But it does.

If money wasn't an issue, then Artists and the comment about everyone being greatful about their stuff being sent around would be the sole purpose. I mean honestly, I make music, and understand Its 2012, I wont be making bookoo bucks off it anytime soon, so my music is free. I've had it get around more easily and have gotten bookings and offers this way, it's honestly a godsend to have people take a liking to your creations and pass it around.

Maybe if artists would post things online more often and allow people to hear them for free this wouldn't be such an issue,( this is done by some with great success, and is catching on ) they could make money off ads and movies they sell from streaming a not so high quality but watchable movie, or track. Since many only want to make sure they will enjoy what they buy, and really seems to be at the heart of this issue. You will always have horders and exploiters, but the majority I feel are people who just are tired of being ripped off.
edit on 3-10-2012 by Moneyisgodlifeisrented because: explosions



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by eXia7
I stopped buying music the moment I bought a CD with 15 songs on it, but only maybe 2 were good.

Why would I wanna buy an entire CD with crap music for 20$ when all I want is a couple songs?


That's understandable but you can buy just the tracks you want online can you not at maybe a buck per track?

I admit the industry itself has to get with the program, the days of caviar, champagne, wild parties and luxury mansions afforded by financial rape of the artist are gone or should be. I think to a large degree the industry is paying no attention to this fact. Having said that I also find it wrong that a hockey player / football / name a sport player should get sixty million for a seasonal contract while far to many people will go to sleep tonight unfed! This shows me that our priorities are just as whacked as the recording industries, but that's another topic. As for the fees the industry levies for weddings and all other social gatherings...Yes it's obscene but at the same time reflective of how out of touch or just plain unwilling to address the notion that yesterdays gravy train is as dead as the gold rush. I just think in order to forward a better world, we the people have to set the example perhaps...Theft is theft and they've screwed us for a long time, if all we can manage to do is steal back it will just perpetuate itself forever. I know, Idealize much



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by detachedindividual

Originally posted by cconn487
Intellectual property.


Anyone who creates anything should be glad someone takes an interest in something they create. Let alone the fact their work becomes a part of humanity for the enjoyment of everyone. Passed on generation to generation.

I know it doesn't pay the bills, but to know your work will live on forever has to count for something right?
edit on 3-10-2012 by cconn487 because: (no reason given)


Are you seriously saying that people should be happy if their art is worth stealing?

Right, so by your logic someone should create things for you to enjoy, and you should give nothing back at all, they should just be happy that you took it...

Hey, I like your TV. Maybe I'll come over later and help myself to it. Don't get mad though, you should just be happy that you had something I wanted. Think of all the enjoyment I'll get out of it! That's enough for you right? The knowledge that the thing I took from you brings me happiness is all the reward you should ever need.


I'd say not only people should be happy if their creation gives enough interest to be stealed by a few end-users, but i'd even say it's more often benefic for them...
Just think about how many people around the world already at least once downloaded some game/movie/whatever that they would never have bought otherwise, showing it (or trying it with if that's a game) to friends, that your friend(s) see that it's something awesome, then later buy it ? How do you call that ? Piracy ? I call that publicity !
Sometimes it doesn't even imply a friend... I myself already several times bought something I had underground before... But the above example is more self-speaking I think


some corporations likes to make you look like the bad guy in these situations, but in the end, whatever they say, it's still very efficient publicity... and some other corps are perfectly aware of it and just take it into account instead of "fighting" it...
In the end, if a product is pirated or not doesn't change the base equation.... Most people really enjoying it will buy it, and others will do otherwise





top topics
 
39
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join