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.
Originally posted by K J Gunderson
If I steel everything you own and then someone kills the entire family next door, will you be waving off the cops "Don't worry, I just lost all my stuff. Those folks got killed so do not waste any time investigating this crime?"
Originally posted by K J Gunderson
All the technicality in the world does not change the fact that taking something without permission is exactly that.
Originally posted by nerbot
A stupid analogy if you ask me. If the family next door had just been killed, your invisible loss should be the last thing on your mind. Your logic does not apply here.
If you had something stolen but were still in possession of the original with which to still profit from then you haven't really lost anything have you?
, and presuming that the accused thief would go and pay for what they would not buy in the first place is naive and assumes that everyone has surplus money to waste or would buy something just because it's there.
Originally posted by nerbot
And all the logic in the world should tell you that if something is stolen then it is no longer in the owners possession.
What we are talking about here is the wrongful presumtion that those who could not get movies for free online would go and pay for them all instead.
Maybe they'd just not bother, not pay and are maybe not the ideal consumer that hollywood depends on.
Stopping online viewing and downloading of their products WILL NOT make more consumers. Just fewer viewers to talk about their fodder.
Imagine, one day some one makes a device thats hooked to your toilet and converts "used food" into "copied" food and other elements and devices including gold, diamonds and even cars.
Originally posted by XL5
Reposting for those who missed it. Its like every one wants black and white so they can argue about it all day and anyone who shows any thing other then that is ignored.
IMO this is like when cars started to be made and everyone still using horses tried to make laws to protect their outdated way of life (cars may frighten the horses). However, what would happen today if everyone went back to the old way of life and used horses. We can not go backwards.
Originally posted by debunky
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by debunky
You get something for free, that is a product that is sold for money.
Shall we try a few situation where that definition might fit? Ever got a gift from somebody who bought it in a shop? Did that make you a thief?
Huh? The producer received their money for the product.
I mean - that is the bottom line. Isn't it? You create a product with intent to sell for profit. You are entitled to that profit.
Providing that product for Free - - without a license to distribute is theft. So - the website is the thief?
But if you are downloading from these sites - - isn't that receiving stolen property? Ignorance is not an excuse.
------------------------------------------------
I think copyright infringement is getting off topic.
Oh, no worries, your ignorance is excusable. It's a complex topic, and you propably saw lots and lots of "downloading is stealing" ads ...
Ok: I download a DVD rip. The DVD was bought. The producer got his money. That is the bottom line isn't it?
Originally posted by Judohawk
They will not defeat anyone.
For every 9 sites taken down there will be 20 more that pop up just to spite them.
Originally posted by XL5
Yes it is a denial of profit but it will not change as long as there are people who just don't care.
Originally posted by K J Gunderson
Why the hell should I be so concerned with their deaths that I should ignore my complete financial devastation?
Maybe you need to read what I said. I said if someone stole EVERYTHING YOU OWNED. Did you even read any of what you responded to?
To answer your question though, no. Who is going to pay me for it when they can get it cheaper from a thief with copies.
You are not making any sense at all.
You are trying to engage in a semantic war for which you came ill-equipped.
If I create something and you take a copy without my permission, you have stolen my opportunity to profit from my work.
It is not about "stealing" the song itself, it is about stealing the opportunity to use your own creation in the manner in which you intended, even it be to make money.
Originally posted by nerbot
Because they are your neighbours and life should be more important than money.
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by nerbot
Because they are your neighbours and life should be more important than money.
Are you just off in your own little world - or something.
There a new Socialist thread that just started.
What does anything you're saying have to do with Theft and Denial of Profit?
Originally posted by hippomchippo
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by nerbot
Because they are your neighbours and life should be more important than money.
Are you just off in your own little world - or something.
There a new Socialist thread that just started.
What does anything you're saying have to do with Theft and Denial of Profit?
Wow all you do is keep talking about the analogy in the beginning, why skip the rest of his post which has valid points?
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by hippomchippo
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by nerbot
Because they are your neighbours and life should be more important than money.
Are you just off in your own little world - or something.
There a new Socialist thread that just started.
What does anything you're saying have to do with Theft and Denial of Profit?
Wow all you do is keep talking about the analogy in the beginning, why skip the rest of his post which has valid points?
There are no valid points in his posts. There is only Twisted manipulation.
You CAN NOT justify Theft - - causing Denial of Profit.
No matter how hard you try - - - it Can Not be done.
[edit on 2-7-2010 by Annee]
Originally posted by hippomchippo
It's theft of a copy, not actual theft.
Originally posted by nerbot
Because they are your neighbours and life should be more important than money.
Obviously you disagree and would sell your mother if it made a buck!
This is not about everything someone owns is it? This is about someone watching a copy and never having the intention of buying it in the first place.
The same people who go to the movies or buy DVDs of course.
That's because you refuse to see both sides and consider this from anything but the profiteer's point of view.
What utter nonsense!
Do you mean to say that you would just throw your master copy in the bin? I think not. You would carry on as usual and continue to profit from sales.
Are you blind to the fact that the opportunity would still be staring you in the face...or would you still give up and throw away your masterpiece just so you felt justified in pointing a finger and yelling "thief"?
Carry on thinking inside your little box, good luck.