Piracy

[johnj]

create something and watch the whole world rip it, monetize it without paying you for it and then try justifying their stealing of your work as a form of free speech.

It seems the issue isn't piracy itself, it's lack of compensation for the creator.  I think people who pirate agree.  Most of the cost goes to the distributor and licence fees.

Take Steam for example.  They're able to offer incredible deals, taking smaller cuts on a much MUCH higher volume. Somtimes 40x higher volume gross revenue.  (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/10/24/less-is-more-gabe-newell-on-game-pricing/). Even the current HumbleBundle (http://www.humblebundle.com/) has over $600,000 towards it, when if people were as greedy as the anti-piracy folk make them out to be, it'd be $0.  People want to pay a reasonable price for things.

The middleman wants to pin the higher prices on the 'loss' from pirates, when it's the other way around.

Get the middleman in check and you'll see increased profits for the creator as well as wider distribution of the content, and you can even keep all the red tape of licensing. The end-user will always go the path of least resistance.

[kiyote]

I'm not Serge, but I like putting in my two cents, so here we go. 

If I pirate something that I had no intention in buying in the first place, is that still theft? The copyright owner is not missing any revenue from me.

It's not theft, but it's still copyright infringement.  It's like saying stealing a Maserati isn't theft because you couldn't afford one anyway.  Not losing revenue doesn't change what it is, just arguably changes the damages. 

I'm subscribed to HBO but I don't feel like watching Boardwalk Empire on Sunday night, so instead I pirate it Monday morning and watch it on my computer. Is that theft?

The Betamax case, which states viewers are allowed to time-shift their television watching, puts you into a legal grey area, as it would the website hosting the file.  The person who uploaded it would have been breaking copyright law.   

If you owned the DVD, and were ripping it to watch on your computer/iPad, you would be breaking the law under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act due to the fact you were circumventing copyright protection, despite the fact that you were covered by Fair Use.  (I agree, this is asinine).

I buy an Xbox game and make a backup just in case. After some months the original disc is unreadable so I start playing with the backup. Is that stealing?

This is allowed under Fair Use.

I just recorded some songs that were playing in the radio and now I can listen to them unlimited times for free. Am I a dirty thief?

Believe it or not, this is one of those cases that's never been judged.  A company was sued by the entertainment industry over this, but the company's legal fees caused it to go bankrupt before a decision was made, so who knows how this could go?  Overall, it seems like the record industry really doesn't care that much.

On a side note, copyright was created originally as a legal agreement between the government and content creators, saying that if you agree to make stuff, we'll give you control over that stuff for a limited period of time.  After that period of time is up, it passes into the public domain, which means anyone can riff off of it, and create their own material based off of it.  But companies and estates have pushed copyright to become so ridiculously long, it essentially excludes anyone from ever being able to use anyone else's work without paying for it because copyright now goes on for essentially forever, here in the States.

This video is very interesting:  http://youtu.be/tk862BbjWx4

[zer0]

Let me ask you this is it ok to go to restaurant or store and taking something with having no intention of ever paying for it?

Piracy = Copy
Your hypothetical situation is invalid.

Here's one for you, suppose there's a medication patented by a large Pharma corp that's too expensive for countries to afford? Suppose China, India and Cuba 'pirate' the formula and make inexpensive clone generics saving millions of people's lives. Would you still be against piracy?

This is what 'Intellectual Copyright' has given humanity:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/oct/04/microsoft-motorola-android-patent-lawsuit

A confusing web of endless lawsuits as corporations fight for control of everything

[kiyote]

Let me ask you this is it ok to go to restaurant or store and taking something with having no intention of ever paying for it?

Piracy = Copy
Your hypothetical situation is invalid.

Here's one for you, suppose there's a medication patented by a large Pharma corp that's too expensive for countries to afford? Suppose China, India and Cuba 'pirate' the formula and make inexpensive clone generics saving millions of people's lives. Would you still be against piracy?

This is what 'Intellectual Copyright' has given humanity:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/oct/04/microsoft-motorola-android-patent-lawsuit

A confusing web of endless lawsuits as corporations fight for control of everything

There's two things at work here, and they're not necessarily the same thing:  what's legal and what's ethical.  In your drug example, China, India or Cuba mass producing a drug that's too expensive for them to buy may be the ethical thing to do, but it's still breaking international patent law.

To give you a flip example from the business world, I'll give you a case study from the startup Callpod and their dealings with Target:  Callpod produces a universal charging device called Chargepod, which has become a big hit.  Attempting to increase distribution, Callpod seeks a deal with Target in order to nationally distribute the Chargepod, but the deal hits a snag, but eight months later, a clone of the product, being produced by Target themselves, appears in their stores.  Callpod, which was smart enough to file a number of patents on the Chargepod technology, sues Target, who never had any real desire to sell the original Chargepod in their stores, and wins damages.

Target behaved illegally and maybe immorally in this case, but every move they did was the right move from the business perspective.  They knew that startup companies aren't usually the best at defending cases of patent infringement.  Most of the time, they don't pursue any civil suits, and if they do, they hire inexperienced lawyer friends who get beat in court.  In this case, Target was wrong, but more often than not, they would be able be able to sell the product without having to pay any of the licensing fees or any negative repercussions.  And even in this case where there were repercussions, they weren't enough to damage, or even noticeably dent Targets earnings.

When you download files off the internet, you're behaving like Target:  you may have virtually no chance of getting caught, and are gaining access to tools you wouldn't otherwise, but it's still copyright infringement.  Spare us the rationalizations, and have the balls to admit that you're doing something illegal, even if you won't get caught.

[Vanderbleek]

I think copyright law as it is now is ridiculous, but I also think everyone's going about "fighting the power" the wrong way. If their copyright is causing you problems, make something better, and release it under the public domain (or whatever license you prefer). Write a better book, code a better game, direct a better movie, and release them all with no copyright protection. "Be the change you wish to see in the world."

Essentially: make copyright obsolete.

[RandyFolds]

if you got something for free that is not free - you stole it.

Are you retarded? I went and panned gold today. I got a couple grams. It's near $2k an ounce. It was free. Did I steal it from the ground?

[phillipsjk]

i don't think piracy act could be successively used for censorship of free speech tho.

By suppressing "piracy", you are suppressing free speach. The same ISP measures meant to restrict my ability to .torrent a copy of "The Hurt Locker" also inhibits my ability to .torrent the latest freebsd DVD. Pirated content can always be disguised as free speech simply by employing encryption. Encryption that is employed by "legitimate" games to hide how the server communication protocol works.

I am not even sure Piracy is distinct from free speech from  a social point of view. Since copyright was invented about 400 years ago, copyright terms have been extended from 14 years (renewable) to life of the author + 70 years in some jurisdictions. Now, the average person does not have a reasonable expectation that they will be able to (legally) freely copy a fixation they purchased within their lifetime, or even before the fixation degrades. Copyright was originally designed to give the original authors a chance to sell cheap plentiful copies before everybody else does. Nowdays, producing a cheap copy of a Public Domain work is copyrightable since copyright now lasts so long that the original has degraded to the point of requiring restoration.

Rogers violating internet rules, CRTC says
Games being degraded by bittorrent throttling.

European Parliament Legalized Censorship in Europe Today; Pirate Rep Voted Against
European Parliament agrees to Internet Censorship in principle in order to stop child porn. Since child porn is so evil, nobody can reveiw the back-list for correctness.

create something and watch the whole world rip it, monetize it without paying you for it and then try justifying their stealing of your work as a form of free speech.

I was not aware on this thread, and responded in the original thread instead.

Your conclusions are based on crass assumptions. I am a member of the Pirate Party of Canada; not because I "pirate" commercial/proprietary works, but because I love Free (as in freedom) and Open Source Software. I have stopped buying most shrink-wrapped software and shiny optical disks with music and video over DRM concerns. I see "Intellectual Property" issues as human rights issues. Copyright, trademark, patent, etc, law is being used to trample (physical) property rights, the right to an education, the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, etc.

PS: You can pay for FOSS software: it is free as in freedom, not price. In fact, I think the OpenBSD project strongly encourages you to pay for the software.

[kokjo]

Serge: STFU and let the market talk!

[payb.tc]

i guess i have to spell it out what i mean by "stealing"

stealing copyright holder's ability to rightfully benefit of of their creation

why do you feel that copyright holders automatically have a right to benefit from their creation?

what if i create the digital equivalent of a steaming pile of turd, and then i copyright it?

how do i then have a right to benefit from my creation?

[kokjo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LkWKvMCzqA - jack black talking about piracy.

please notice, that he is talking about incitement. what he says boils down to: no money -> no music.
THIS IS WRONG! because a real artist does care about his/hers art, not his wallet.

an artist should in my opinion, do it for the art, not the profit. of course the artist should be rewarded for his work.
an musician should hold concerts. but his record music, should be free.
i have a problem with paying for some that could easily be copied.
but i have no problem with going to a concert with a band. (except that im a rather poor student).

a concert can not be copied!

[NghtRppr]

create something and watch the whole world rip it, monetize it without paying you for it and then try justifying their stealing of your work as a form of free speech.

I've netted a million dollars from the sale of intellectual property, have you? I doubt it. I'm still against intellectual property rights even though I have every incentive to be pro-IP. Why? Because intellectual property rights are immoral. I have no right to kick down doors, arrest people, force them to pay fines at gunpoint, all just because they used their computers to communicate information in a way that disrupts my revenue stream. If the entire world pirates my software, that's the greatest thing that could ever happen to me. I'll get job offers, ad revenue, speaking engagements, paid support requests, consultant offers, donations, etc, etc, etc. Being popular is almost never a curse. It's when people don't want to obtain your work no matter how low the price is, that's when you should worry. I'm speaking from experience. I love my 2010 Lexus RX350 but not enough to suggest that we lock people in cages or threaten them just so I can keep driving it.

[kiyote]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LkWKvMCzqA - jack black talking about piracy.

please notice, that he is talking about incitement. what he says boils down to: no money -> no music.
THIS IS WRONG! because a real artist does care about his/hers art, not his wallet.

an artist should in my opinion, do it for the art, not the profit. of course the artist should be rewarded for his work.
an musician should hold concerts. but his record music, should be free.
i have a problem with paying for some that could easily be copied.
but i have no problem with going to a concert with a band. (except that im a rather poor student).

a concert can not be copied!

Okay, this is bullshit.  I'm a comedian and a comedy writer, and know a lot of actors and musicians, and they all want to get paid, because although they are doing what they love, at the end of the day, they still need to eat.

I personally creative commons everything I write, but that's because I have a career outside of writing, and I don't plan on making money off of it or doing it as my full time job.  But most of my friends have to work at shit jobs like waiting tables and clerks at law offices just to make ends meet, so they can do the thing that they love.

And you say, "Musicians should just do concerts!"  Concerts are one of the most grueling things a musician can do, months away from friends and family, traveling from unknown place to unknown place, and guess what?  Musicians already do them!  It's how they make ends meet to begin making their next album.

Your entitled attitude is astounding.  Maybe its because you're looking at that small percentage of musicians and actors who make a lot of money, and are forgetting about that 99.99% of them that are just figuring out how to get enough money to buy a few packs of ramen to eat. 

I will admit, I pirate a fair amount of stuff, but I also budget a certain amount of money each month to go back and buy the albums I like and will re-listen to.  If you're broke, I get it, I've been there, and it didn't stop me from downloading music, but quit with the entitlement shit.  It makes you look like an asshole.

[kokjo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LkWKvMCzqA - jack black talking about piracy.

please notice, that he is talking about incitement. what he says boils down to: no money -> no music.
THIS IS WRONG! because a real artist does care about his/hers art, not his wallet.

an artist should in my opinion, do it for the art, not the profit. of course the artist should be rewarded for his work.
an musician should hold concerts. but his record music, should be free.
i have a problem with paying for some that could easily be copied.
but i have no problem with going to a concert with a band. (except that im a rather poor student).

a concert can not be copied!

Okay, this is bullshit.  I'm a comedian and a comedy writer, and know a lot of actors and musicians, and they all want to get paid, because although they are doing what they love, at the end of the day, they still need to eat.

I personally creative commons everything I write, but that's because I have a career outside of writing, and I don't plan on making money off of it or doing it as my full time job.  But most of my friends have to work at shit jobs like waiting tables and clerks at law offices just to make ends meet, so they can do the thing that they love.

And you say, "Musicians should just do concerts!"  Concerts are one of the most grueling things a musician can do, months away from friends and family, traveling from unknown place to unknown place, and guess what?  Musicians already do them!  It's how they make ends meet to begin making their next album.

Your entitled attitude is astounding.  Maybe its because you're looking at that small percentage of musicians and actors who make a lot of money, and are forgetting about that 99.99% of them that are just figuring out how to get enough money to buy a few packs of ramen to eat. 

I will admit, I pirate a fair amount of stuff, but I also budget a certain amount of money each month to go back and buy the albums I like and will re-listen to.  If you're broke, I get it, I've been there, and it didn't stop me from downloading music, but quit with the entitlement shit.  It makes you look like an asshole.

dude! i play classical guitar, im not doing it for the money! im doing it for the music, because i think its fun!
the 99.99% aren't getting anything anyway.

im not talking about a world tourney. play for your community, play for fun, not money.

(i am the 99%, fuck you im know what im talking about.)

[Serge]

if you got something for free that is not free - you stole it.

Are you retarded? I went and panned gold today. I got a couple grams. It's near $2k an ounce. It was free. Did I steal it from the ground?

retardation is your natural state.

[Serge]

guys supporting piracy, go pirate open source all you want if you like free so much - i won't say a word.   don't use any copyrighted material if you have no desire to pay for it - it is not made for you.

[johnj]

guys supporting piracy, go pirate open source all you want if you like free so much - i won't say a word.   don't use any copyrighted material if you have no desire to pay for it - it is not made for you.

If it makes you feel any better, I'm currently downloading over 9000 pieces of copyrighted material, and after I'm done I'm going to kick a puppy.

[Serge]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LkWKvMCzqA - jack black talking about piracy.

please notice, that he is talking about incitement. what he says boils down to: no money -> no music.
THIS IS WRONG! because a real artist does care about his/hers art, not his wallet.

an artist should in my opinion, do it for the art, not the profit. of course the artist should be rewarded for his work.
an musician should hold concerts. but his record music, should be free.
i have a problem with paying for some that could easily be copied.
but i have no problem with going to a concert with a band. (except that im a rather poor student).

a concert can not be copied!

stop stealing music from not real artists, the real artist will hand it off to you for free! what's the problem?

[kokjo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LkWKvMCzqA - jack black talking about piracy.

please notice, that he is talking about incitement. what he says boils down to: no money -> no music.
THIS IS WRONG! because a real artist does care about his/hers art, not his wallet.

an artist should in my opinion, do it for the art, not the profit. of course the artist should be rewarded for his work.
an musician should hold concerts. but his record music, should be free.
i have a problem with paying for some that could easily be copied.
but i have no problem with going to a concert with a band. (except that im a rather poor student).

a concert can not be copied!

stop stealing music from not real artists, the real artist will hand it off to you for free! what's the problem?

that unreal artists also plays well.

let me ask you a question:

would you copy a car, if you could? and all it took, was a little bandwidth. would you?

[Serge]

let me ask you a question:

would you copy a car, if you could? and all it took, was a little bandwidth. would you?

i said it earlier in the thread if pirates had ability to do same thing (taking/using/stealing/copying w/o permission) to tangibles like smartphones, cars and anything else, without repercussion they would do it in a heart-beat. you don't have to be Nostradamus to realize it.

[kokjo]

let me ask you a question:

would you copy a car, if you could? and all it took, was a little bandwidth. would you?

i said it earlier in the thread if pirates had ability to do same thing (taking/using/stealing/copying w/o permission) to tangibles like smartphones, cars and anything else, without repercussion they would do it in a heart-beat. you don't have to be Nostradamus to realize it.

would you do it? the question was not: "would I do it?", because i already know that answer.