SOPA

[Texsox]

but in my case i wouldn't be stealing the mercedes G series, id be receiving a copy of a mercedes G series and leaving the original to its rightful owner.

Agreed. But if exact copies were available, who would actually pay for one? And are there any "owners" when it is free?

[iamshack]

Digital copies don't actually cost someone money directly. Stolen physical product does.

 

Breaking the internet and draconian copyright laws aren't the solution to outdated business models.

They sure do.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

It's very possible that you have this backwards--that people do not want to pay $20 for an album but would gladly pay, say, $5 or $10. The same for new movies.

 

If the RIAA and MPAA hadn't been such dinosaurs and completely resisted digital supply going back to Napster, they wouldn't be in these positions.

 

If you shoplift a movie from Wal-Mart, it doesn't matter what you would have paid for it. They base the loss and the charges against you on the sticker price. What you would have paid for it is irrelevant as far as the court of law is concerned.

[StrangeSox]

If you shoplift a movie from Wal-Mart, it doesn't matter what you would have paid for it. They base the loss and the charges against you on the sticker price. What you would have paid for it is irrelevant as far as the court of law is concerned.

This is 100% true and completely irrelevant when trying to assess the actual economic impact of piracy, especially since piracy involves digital copies and not physical goods.

[StrangeSox]

When the free item is readily available, why buy an original? Of course it costs them money. It may not be 100% of all the downloads, but it certainly costs them some. At least some of the people would have purchased the music.

 

How will a new business model work where only one person has to pay for the product? Why should anyone buy an original? It is easy to say it is an outdated business model, but allowing your product or service to be stolen isn't outdated.

The compelling counter example is current reality--these things are readily available for free, yet they still generate billions. I also have zero sympathy for industries who fight vehemently against innovation and do everything they can to stop it in order to protect their current positions.

 

Goods are stolen from retail stores frequently. Is the appropriate response security checkpoints and strip searches at mall entry points? Or do we instead go with much less intrusive measures?

 

Again, appropriate responses in scale with the problems.

[StrangeSox]

Agreed. But if exact copies were available, who would actually pay for one? And are there any "owners" when it is free?

Quite a few people.

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2008/BATM2-DVD.php

http://thepiratebay.org/search/The%20dark%20knight/0/99/0

 

Should libraries be illegal? They buy one copy of a book and thousands read it. Many even offer digital books now, as well.

[Jenksismyhero]

The compelling counter example is current reality--these things are readily available for free, yet they still generate billions. I also have zero sympathy for industries who fight vehemently against innovation and do everything they can to stop it in order to protect their current positions.

 

Goods are stolen from retail stores frequently. Is the appropriate response security checkpoints and strip searches at mall entry points? Or do we instead go with much less intrusive measures?

 

Again, appropriate responses in scale with the problems.

 

I'd dispute "readily" available. They're available to a pretty small minority of those who (1) know where to find it and (2) make the decision to do get it despite it being illegal/immoral. So, probably 5% of the US internet population.

 

Ignoring the domestic side of this (since you keep bringing that up despite all indications being that none of that will be included in the bill), how else could you stop overseas pirating of copyrighted materials? You can't go after the source, so you have to go after the means in which people access the source.

 

[iamshack]

The compelling counter example is current reality--these things are readily available for free, yet they still generate billions. I also have zero sympathy for industries who fight vehemently against innovation and do everything they can to stop it in order to protect their current positions.

 

Goods are stolen from retail stores frequently. Is the appropriate response security checkpoints and strip searches at mall entry points? Or do we instead go with much less intrusive measures?

 

Again, appropriate responses in scale with the problems.

Well, if you are in a retail store and they suspect you have stolen something or are attempting to steal something, they can and do search you and they do indeed detain you.

 

What is the appropriate model?

[Quin]

I just really hate when the RIAA tries to make itself a victim.

 

 

Now, obviously musicians make 0 profit on Piracy, but it means interest in the artist which can translate to concerts/youtube hits/etc.

 

And now, because I really hate the RIAA...

 

http://www.cracked.com/funny-2153-riaa/

http://www.cracked.com/photoplasty_147_if-...il-as-riaa_p17/

http://www.cracked.com/blog/649/

http://www.cracked.com/article_17215_the-7...r-tantrums.html

 

My favorite rapper is DeStorm, who is unsigned and on YouTube. If some of his past songs are any indication why he chooses to remain unsigned it's because he wouldn't be allowed to just release his music as he saw fit, the RIAA would have total and complete control over all his music.

 

f*** I hate the RIAA.

[Texsox]

The compelling counter example is current reality--these things are readily available for free, yet they still generate billions. I also have zero sympathy for industries who fight vehemently against innovation and do everything they can to stop it in order to protect their current positions.

 

Goods are stolen from retail stores frequently. Is the appropriate response security checkpoints and strip searches at mall entry points? Or do we instead go with much less intrusive measures?

 

Again, appropriate responses in scale with the problems.

 

So should we stop prosecuting or stopping piracy?

[Texsox]

Quite a few people.

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2008/BATM2-DVD.php

http://thepiratebay.org/search/The%20dark%20knight/0/99/0

 

Should libraries be illegal? They buy one copy of a book and thousands read it. Many even offer digital books now, as well.

 

They lend each paid copy once at a time. I'm ok with that for music downloads as long as only one paid copy is being listened to at a time. Libraries do not buy one copy and then make 50 copies for their borrowers.

 

btw No book last through 1,000 borrowers. Libraries are buying multiple copies both on first release and later when their copy wears out. How many copies of cds does Mediafire purchase?

[southsider2k5]

They lend each paid copy once at a time. I'm ok with that for music downloads as long as only one paid copy is being listened to at a time. Libraries do not buy one copy and then make 50 copies for their borrowers.

 

btw No book last through 1,000 borrowers. Libraries are buying multiple copies both on first release and later when their copy wears out. How many copies of cds does Mediafire purchase?

 

And at the end of the day, they get the original back.

[StrangeSox]

So should we stop prosecuting or stopping piracy?

Nope. I've said in this thread I don't see a problem with the mega upload bust.

[StrangeSox]

I'd dispute "readily" available. They're available to a pretty small minority of those who (1) know where to find it and (2) make the decision to do get it despite it being illegal/immoral. So, probably 5% of the US internet population.

 

so it really isn't an issue then! Certainly not one that requires changing the nature of the internet.

 

Ignoring the domestic side of this (since you keep bringing that up despite all indications being that none of that will be included in the bill), how else could you stop overseas pirating of copyrighted materials? You can't go after the source, so you have to go after the means in which people access the source.

 

Us laws can't stop overseas piracy. It only restricts us access to it, and even then not really.

 

[StrangeSox]

They lend each paid copy once at a time. I'm ok with that for music downloads as long as only one paid copy is being listened to at a time. Libraries do not buy one copy and then make 50 copies for their borrowers.

 

btw No book last through 1,000 borrowers. Libraries are buying multiple copies both on first release and later when their copy wears out. How many copies of cds does Mediafire purchase?

But they still lend out books and movies and cd's. That represents lost possible sales. Why does anyone pay for books when they can go to the library for free?

[Jenksismyhero]

so it really isn't an issue then! Certainly not one that requires changing the nature of the internet.

 

 

 

Us laws can't stop overseas piracy. It only restricts us access to it, and even then not really.

 

It's not changing the nature of the internet. They did the same thing with online poker/gambling sites and the world is still standing.

 

 

 

[DrunkBomber]

Whenever you feel bad or guilty about pirating music or movies just watch a few episodes of cribs and youll feel better.

[Iwritecode]

They lend each paid copy once at a time. I'm ok with that for music downloads as long as only one paid copy is being listened to at a time. Libraries do not buy one copy and then make 50 copies for their borrowers.

 

Not true for ebooks.

 

 

[vandy125]

Not true for ebooks.

 

Actually, I think that when you get ebooks from libraries, they only have a certain amount that they can "lend" out. I haven't done it yet on my Kindle yet, but at least with that process you need to give it back to them after a certain amount of time. Some of the ebooks are unavailable until someone checks back in their copy.

Edited January 20, 2012 by vandy125

[vandy125]

Whenever you feel bad or guilty about pirating music or movies just watch a few episodes of cribs and youll feel better.

 

Stealing is stealing regardless of who you take it from... Should the guy who had a lobster at KWs should feel better because of how much KW has?

[Balta1701]

Stealing is stealing regardless of who you take it from... Should the guy who had a lobster at KWs should feel better because of how much KW has?

But who owns an idea? If the guy recited shakespeare while stealing that lobster, isn't he also stealing shakespeare's work?

 

We've given types of art a unique place in the law already. You can't physically rob me of an idea or of a song I sing at gunpoint. But we've declared that certain ideas can be under control for certain time periods under certain conditions because it generates an economic and cultural benefit. Intellectual property isn't open and shut like stealing a lobster.

[Soxbadger]

The problem is that copyright laws were not created for a digital age.

 

When it was books/paintings, you really didnt have this issue. If I bought a book at the store, I could sell my book to my friends, I could lend my book to my friend, it was my physical copy. If I buy a Picasso, I own the work (work for hire is a completely different area so maybe not a good example), I can sell the work, I can profit off the work.

 

The problem in the digital age is that when I give my mp3 to my friend, it is in some ways no different than giving a book, but in other ways its drastically different. And thus we have the legal problem, if when I buy something I have an ownership right to it, how can the law restrict what I do with my own copy?

 

The record companies will say that the sale of the record is more akin to a license, and therefore they can govern the use like a license.

 

Non record companies will argue that its nothing like a license, that it more akin to a product, and thus the end user has pretty much free reign to do what it wants with its product.

 

I personally believe the second way is more in line with American legal theory. I think that if you are going to enforce the law, it has to be against the person downloading it and that there is really very little cause of action against someone who uploads.

 

 

[Texsox]

Nope. I've said in this thread I don't see a problem with the mega upload bust.

 

Why? If piracy isn't wrong, and doesn't hurt anyone, why support the law?

[Texsox]

But they still lend out books and movies and cd's. That represents lost possible sales. Why does anyone pay for books when they can go to the library for free?

 

They are lending a bought and paid for item. Again, I am fine if someone loans someone a download as long as only one paid copy exists. The problem becomes when one paid copy is then copied and now there are 1 paid copy and hundreds or thousands of unpaid copies out there. It seems like an obvious difference.

 

People buy because they want ownership and being able to use something when they want to. If the library has the item checked out they would have to wait. Plus libraries sometimes trim their collections and the item is no longer available.

[Texsox]

Not true for ebooks.

 

The publishers charge per edition that is being borrowed. Usually it is a license fee.