PIRACY - Should not be a crime... here is why:

S&F from an old warez geek

Ko3

reply to post by GringoViejo

he doesn't mind if people don't always pay for a CD, or pay to get into a show. If someone hears his music and likes it, he doesn't care how they heard it.

That is the point that I make all the time, sharing a musicians album with someone else (and really, what is the difference between sharing with a friend or neighbor vs. sharing with someone in another state or country?) amounts to free viral marketing, especially for a musician that is not heard on the radio 5-8 times/day. The more people that know about a musician, the bigger the pool of potential customers of CD's and performances. Who, especially these days, drops $16 on the CD of a musician they have never heard/heard of? Or pays $20-80 bucks to go to a concert of someone they don't know and love?

reply to post by lellomackin

So, you are in favor of bands giving away free tickets to all their shows? I mean they are playing already right? If they sell one ticket they have to play for that person anyway and everyone else should be let in for free. What's the difference if there is one person there or a thousand?

No, of course not, plus, that is an idiotic argument. First of all, musicians only see about $1.60 in profit from the sale of a $16 CD, the rest goes to the label and the industry. Concerts have always been the major way musicians make money.

Secondly, they are working for their money when they play a show. Hell, I'll drop a dollar in a busker's instrument case because I appreciate the effort and the product. However, with recorded material, they lay it down once and it is done having become a bunch of instantaneously transferrable digital 1's and 0's.

Finally, like I said in my above post. No one is going to go to the concert of a band that they don't know. Some bands, starting out, will play all sorts of free shows just to get their name out there. Why not sling around a lot of free 1's and 0's so that they don't have to work so hard playing the free shows and are able, by that means of marketing, to fill up a concert.

If you want a great example of this check out Girl Talk. Girl Talk is one guy and his laptop. His albums are composed entirely of other people's samples, most if not all without permission, citing fair use. His latest is "All Day" and is a 70 min album with 375 samples. With no advertising or announcements he released it for free on his website in the middle of the night available at Girl Talk's site: Illegal Art. I went to a sold out Girl Talk concert of 3000 people when he came to my town. The merchandise vendors who travel with him said that virtually every venue he plays is like that. He is doing extremely well for himself and he's a super pirate.The only reason it is still illegal is because it cut's out the label and the "industry" as the middle man.

Further more:

All Day by Girl Talk is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial license. The CC license does not interfere with the rights you have under the fair use doctrine, which gives you permission to make certain uses of the work even for commercial purposes. Also, the CC license does not grant rights to non-transformative use of the source material Girl Talk used to make the album.

I download a PC game pirated, if i like it i will buy it.

How many times have i wasted £40 on a game which turns out to be complete and utter crap.

I agree copyright and persecution for infringement of is a farce. Being lazy, below is a copy-paste dump of a post created a while back on another site but which I'm willing to discuss further if anyone is interested.

I have read so many articles on copyright I figured I had better write my own. Before the current technological age the art of symbolism was arduous the principles of construction were unknown and we now store these works of art in buildings these works which lack perspective or some such subtle detail. That age is over it's the twenty first century and its time we took stock of the situation to utilise it for the benefit of the planet as a whole. As with most endeavours time is critical and so I will but highlight the areas of interest in regards to the current atmosphere of copyright frenzy. Life is patterns the simplest and most direct evidence of this is the genome but further the fractal nature of the universe has been analysed and re purposed for the required need, for instance the use of a specific type of mathematics to enable the compression of image data in the JPEG file format. A majority of the work whether it is artistic or not is representable using digital devices, right now we capture and replay audio and video of such a quality that it is near impossible without training to detect the subtle differences between the reality of what is being represented and the symbolism. The age of digital art is clearly upon us else I would not be writing on this website. An understanding of what a tool is how its built and how a tool is used are vastly different and for the majority of artists it is not necessary to know the way in which a pixel is garnered as long as they exist and a digital brush is at hand contentment is to be had. I read an article recently on the art piece known as "The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living" in the article there was a quote where someone had asked the artist why he had done it and his response was because he could, this is something I would like everyone to keep in mind for the remainder of this journal. A man sculpts a bust of some celebrity of antiquity that same bust is created using the same materials to the exact same specifications as the original but this time the piece is printed using a 3D printer. Which piece is art? It is inherently clear that the monetary system has tainted art as it has become the mass manufacture of goods, but that is the modern world in which we live however it should not dilute the stream of truth with #. Every image we view on a digital device every piece of audio we listen to on a digital device is a mathematical construction. A construction which is independent of time and this is the problem inherent in copyright. If I were to ask you to think of a number you are able to do so, in a similar fashion one may program a computer to think of a number and as all audio image and video data is but a mathematical construct built using the numerical system applied to components of a device to produce a desired symbolic output it is not that large a leap to the realisation that any piece of art is representable in this system regardless of creation time or artists permission thus calling into question the validity of copyright law. The absurdity of the system we have in place is to be ridiculed as is the lack of honesty in regards to judgement of certain copyright claims throughout history. The full impact of this information has clearly not taken hold in the public census and that is an open wound asking for infection. The distribution of funds is an immediate assumption for where the blame should be placed this though is not likely to occur as the disclosure of information is detrimental to the power base. Where solace may be found is in the fact that your act of creation is more profound than anything you could create. also once the flood gates have opened and the information truly disseminates into the general populace credit will be applied where credit is due. I have left this journal without mathematical evidence to back up the claims however everything of which I speak is available and fairly well documented the dots simply haven't been connected. Google and Wikipedia are excellent tools use them you never know what you might find.

further are two links demonstrating the ignorance of specialisation and why no knowledge should be kept under lock and key.

lighttrap.codeplex.com

and

code.msdn.microsoft.com/lighttrap

It seems that the problem is that once those who have been educated by the system realise the implications of its use tend to either add to their already overwhelmed systems further mental ailments leading to a state where the information and its use is no longer viable or they concede to corruption.

reply to post by AlertInMi

If you make piracy legal, the quality of product and or services will go down hill fast.

If software was free, do you think we would have windows 7?

*AHEM*





en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by byteshertz

*cough*
Linux
*cough*

Oh... Well Hello there....


reply to post by Hellhound604

Have you ever heard of Free Software, like Linux....

Oh.... Well.... hello..... there....

This is for everybody who argues against the OP. You need to think of the little fact that when considering pirated movies, television, and software, unless independent which can usually be found legally for free somewhere, it often isn't the creators who are losing money but it is the companies and corporations who have more money than they could ever need. The companies usually employee the creators of these products and those creators usually don't see any extra pay from future sales. I may be mistaken but when actors make a movie I'm not too sure that they get paid for that movie 4 years after its DVD/BLURAY release and I don't think they see a percentage of each sale...
Why are so many people in support of greedy corporations that want to make YOU work harder for less?

Originally posted by byteshertz
Piracy does not remove the original from anyone it simply copies it, therefore no theft has taken place, and no money has been lost unless someone can prove you intended to buy it beforehand.

edit on 16-11-2011 by byteshertz because: (no reason given)

No you're completely wrong.

You are just justifying it because you like to steal crap, basically.

Just like me.. I know it is wrong and the industry hurts from it but I do it anyways.

Why the hell do you think we are bombarded with tools like Beiber... because the CDs sell... because we wouldn't teach our kids to steal. Stretching it? Maybe.

While I do not believed that piracy destroyed the music industry, it did hurt it substantially and that sucks.

You know what else it hurt? Publishers and producers of the very product you claim to love.

Stop sticking up for stealing someone's crap. I hurts more than just a big business exec pockets. It ultimately hurts the producers and studios that helped.

As a creator of multiple things from games to cartoons I am speaking from my heart.

Just my 2 cents.

Funny thing is I don't believe in DRM. I just think that people should buy it if they like the product.

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by AlertInMi

 

If you make piracy legal, the quality of product and or services will go down hill fast.

If software was free, do you think we would have windows 7?

*AHEM*

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by byteshertz

 

*cough*
Linux
*cough*

Oh... Well Hello there....

reply to post by Hellhound604

 

Have you ever heard of Free Software, like Linux....

Oh.... Well.... hello..... there....

edit on 16-11-2011 by ErtaiNaGia because: (no reason given)

I don't want to get into a stupid Linux vs Windows vs Apple pissing match, but for most people Linux isn't a honest option and most people know this.

Not that things like Ubuntu or Yellow Dog didn't help... but those still required more setup than a "Grandma Mayvis" or "Aunt June" can handle.

byteshertz

I must say I agree with all of your post. I was actually thinking about it earlier and I remember thinking,... uh... why in the hell is this illegal, and why the hell are there actually people who seem hell bent on the idea of "censoring the internet?" WTF? I can understand why the musicians and actors don't want this to happen, but the government? Sounds like money takes first rank, and disinformation/no information ranks second?

reply to post by byteshertz


Interesting argument, but thieves will always be thieves. I'm amazed how many on here try to justify stealing and know it reveals who they really are inside. Rationalizing stealing is something only a thief in denial would attempt to do.

Why would you steal something you don't want? If you want it, why would you not want the creator to earn something for their work? If it's something you don't want, why steal it in the first place?

I'd say if its not important enough you are willing to buy it and you take it anyway it's a way of life and an obsession. No amount of excuse making will change that.

People do it because they think they can do it without getting caught, so what the hell, steal it. Get caught and see how many people will hire you knowing you can't be trusted. See if the courts care if you make false excuses for being a criminal.

You must be feeling guilty to even attempt to rationalize committing a theft of intellectual property. Just like a product you might shoplift in a store it takes work and money to create it. Some may not resort to breaking and entering or shoplifting only because they are fearful of the consequences, but if they do this they are highly likely to go further. Once you decide the world owes you, you cross the line.

I'd bet if I stole something you worked for or created you would scream at the top of your lungs. Can I break into your home and take your stuff? I won't buy it, but hey why not steal it as it's not stealing since I won't buy it. Same thing.

if downloading music makes you a pirate, then apple builds the pirate ships armed with every weapon needed to accomplish the theft.

no one seems to go after apple and ipods.

reply to post by byteshertz


What you are calling piracy is, in fact, unauthorized duplication and distribution of copyrighted material. When called by its real name, it is hard to get any emotional response from the public, so they had to give it a "snappy" title.

By default rights are automatically assigned to the creator of a work (Mechanical Copyright). Distribution and duplication rights can then be apportioned by contract to specific third parties if the creator of the work assigns these rights.

Record companies have several times attempted to sue original creators of works for duplicating and distributing their own works. i,e; the recording and distribution companies themselves are guilty of what they call piracy and have so little concept of the intent of the law that they believe they have the high ground.

True piracy involves organized property theft with violence, especially at sea. Check it out in a dictionary.

Copyright infringement is not piracy.

You obviously have never had an original idea worth protecing. I think that sums it up.

reply to post by byteshertz


I could not agree with you more. It's a shame so many of us have been brainwashed by corporations and others to believe that piracy is wrong or like stealing when it clearly isn't. Too bad it's most likely that the human species will die out before they figure it out. So is the nature of man though. Blind to his own arogance.

Originally posted by StevenDye
reply to post by byteshertz

 

So can you tell me how I update the novel I spent months and months writing?
Or how I update the song I spent months writing, refining and then recording?
Or how I update the short film I wrote, funded, directed and then spent months editing?

You say people need to update and stay ahead, but that only related to the method of delivery, and that isn't possible. I can' update my film to keep it fresh, I can only update what it is delivered on to make it harder to copy, and that requires the device it is played on to be constantly updated too.

But it doesn't work that way round, I have to wait for the device to be updated before I can update my form of delivery so soemones probably cracked the key by the time I get there anyway. Never mind I've cut out a tonne of my market because they don't have this weeks new player.

And these players will get steadily more expensive as they have to be able to unlock more and more protection methods to protect the media under both the current and old methods of protecting it.

So it simply becomes too expensive to be worth it, people stop making these forms of media, and everything reverts back to how it is today. With copyright laws in place so that it is a commerically viable business again.


Software on the other hand can be updated, but not all of it. Some software will do its purpose and can't be updated anymore. You can only take a weather widget so far before it does everything it needs to do. How can you update that? Well you can't so in your eyes too bad, because you managed to make it do everything you now have no 'protection' against people who would like to pirate it.

edit on 16-11-2011 by StevenDye because: (no reason given)

Hi Stevendye,

Great argument mate, and I see your point, however how is it any different than it is currently - Books are very easy to get a hold of through online sharing networks, yet nobody seems to download them much compared to music and movies.
There is something about a book that is special that an electronic copy just does not amount to - people will still buy the books because they enjoy like owning the physical item, there is nothing like a freshly new hard cover book with beautiful pages and in some cases illistrations.
People can easily lend books to their friends right now under the current system, they can run off photocopies - and nobody would be the wiser.. but people don't** because they enjoy the physical possesion of a quality book as much as they enjoy the text contained within it.
As with the software upgradeability issue, I have to disagree. Software can always be improoved in some way, even if it is just a small component of a larger system, the complexity of our current programming level languages means it will always have ways it can be re-written and improved upon. Also in the system I am proposing if you knew your code could be used for years to come and would not profit you further you would simply charge a higher price that both you and the company agree on if you are a contractor - or in the case you are employed full time what you wrote is no longer your property under the current system anyway as the company would have an intellectual property clause in your employment contract stipulating whatever you create while working for them would be their property.

** Educational books are the exception to this rule but they are also heavily copied under the current system and nobody is punished for it any more as Movies and Music are more profitable to chase.

'But I don't wanna be a pirate' - Jerry Seinfeld

Who doesn't pirate things? Sure am glad my dad doesn't beat me for it..........

on camera.

Originally posted by chr0naut
reply to post by byteshertz

 

What you are calling piracy is, in fact, unauthorized duplication and distribution of copyrighted material. When called by its real name, it is hard to get any emotional response from the public, so they had to give it a "snappy" title.

By default rights are automatically assigned to the creator of a work (Mechanical Copyright). Distribution and duplication rights can then be apportioned by contract to specific third parties if the creator of the work assigns these rights.

Record companies have several times attempted to sue original creators of works for duplicating and distributing their own works. i,e; the recording and distribution companies themselves are guilty of what they call piracy and have so little concept of the intent of the law that they believe they have the high ground.

True piracy involves organized property theft with violence, especially at sea. Check it out in a dictionary.

Copyright infringement is not piracy.

edit on 16/11/2011 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)

Hi chr0naut,

Very true thank you for pointing that out - I used the term piracy as it is the name most people associate with the illegal act of unauthorized duplication and distribution of copyrighted material, but what you say is a very valid point. It is not even piracy by definition it is just a title applied to encourage a negative association.

Thanks,

I find allot of what people are saying is funny because...

99% of the software on my computer is completely free, there are paid versions of everything that I use BUT... the paid versions are all "easier" to use for people who are computer idiots, and do not include as many features and as many advanced features....As well as the software being updated more frequently, running faster, and more stable then its paid counter part.

The most interesting part about that is... if this software is free, then why is the quality so good?

Let me give you that answer...for one people that use it give feedback to improve software bugs and code FOR FREE

People donate to the companies because they make software that is worth a damn

People donate their time to work on things for the recognition that they are a badass when it comes to software development NOT BECAUSE THEY MAKE MONEY because they don't

Also a note to people who do not understand how and where the pirated software/music/games/ect comes from... The sources for this are not motivated by money it is against the rules to profit from it, it is a game to these people it is all about bragging rights and the fact that if you build and unbreakable protection WE WILL BREAK IT... might take a while but it will get done (PS3 for example "unhackable" took 1 year.. owned)

The people who do this are much smarter then the people who program these games and software's, anything that can be made by a human can be cracked because it will never be perfect.

You will NEVER end piracy it is only getting easier, you will find that most pirates WILL BUY the product if it is useful and not overpriced which is another big problem is overpricing...

Why is it that when a DVD comes out its $39 but 3 weeks later is $25 and then $19 and then $9.99 and eventually $4.99 at walmart... imagine if you just sold it at $4.99 from the start and everyone bought a copy because its a fair price... there is LITERALLY less then $.50 into the DVD itself and packaging if not less but yet when you buy a digital copy online its no cheaper usually...

If anything companies should stop trying to hard and spending so much money to stop piracy because its going to happen anyways so why waste that money on the newest protections only to have them broken and rendered useless... Some of these new software protection schemes cost well in the $100k's range to develop to only be broken within days or weeks at most....

Open source software like linux and some of the best software, most secure, fastest running there is... Hell microsoft runs linux on its servers you wont find windows on anything they want to run well I can promise you that.. Why would you go with a company that doesn't even use its own software lmao.

If there was no microsoft and no windows like the person stated in the thread then everyone would probably use linux since its free and its would be MUCH more advanced then it is not because since microsoft has monopolized the computer industry most hardware companies do not make their drivers compatible with linux which is the only reason why people dont use linux because of hardware issues... because now days you can have linux look and work exactly like windows so that isn't the issue its the fact that you cant just go to walmart and buy a webcam or modem or whatever and just plug it in and it will work like a windows computer.

Also just to let you know about when these companies say oh we lose this much to piracy... that is all variable math that they are using because they have absolutely no real idea there is no way they could because that would mean that they would know every single person that has pirated something and compared that to how many sales they have lost. It is very loosely based estimations they are also going under the assumption that just because you pirated it that means if you couldn't pirate it you would buy it... well that is simply not true because if you don't have the money to buy it and that is why you pirated it then how would you go out and buy it... or you downloaded it to test it out and you didn't like it so obviously you aren't buying it...

It use to be almost all games had demos released months before they released to hype them and get people wanting the game and I rarely see that now because most games suck and they want you to buy them because you can't return them once opened so they screw you over and you you have review site that are owned by companies like sony that give good reviews on games when really they are crap but they get good numbers so they can sell them...

Also to address this new internet bill to block things.. guess what I don't use regular .com websites to download things so you will not be blocking me from anything I can get around anything they put up so can most computer literate people so good luck with that.. It is just a way to control people and censor the internet its not about stopping piracy.

Questions for you to answer.

What is a PATENT? What is it for?

What is a COPYRIGHT? What is it for?

What is a TRADEMARK? What is it for?

Why are these REQUIRED by law?


Answer these here...and your whole thread goes out the window. Why didnt you do this 1st?