(April 13, 2015 at 7:09 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Benny, the moral framework is stealing. 

Not saying it's necessarily not bad. But I really wish people would stop equating piracy with the word "stealing". They're different things.

---

(April 13, 2015 at 7:14 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: If you download something that's intended to be free (open source software, for example), then it obviously isn't stealing.  If you download something which the owner intended to sell, you're stealing, because you're taking something that doesn't belong to you


Boru

That's not how it works though. Someone who distributes a bunch of copied CD's to his mates isn't stealing.

What we're talking about is intellectual property rights. Not theft. 

I agree that downloading a photo of a painting or digital image I have made and uploaded is not stealing in the sense that I still have the image myself. But it is theft every bit as much as sneaking into the theater or the concert without buying a ticket is theft. It deprives me of the price of the image, which the illicit downloader gets for free. And we are real people that you are stealing from.

Can I stop them? Not easily or perhaps at all. Is it worth it to upload anyway? Yes because it's the best way to sell.

As you might image, I pay for the music, videos, software, and images I download.

Why should you pay? Because it is moral and because if no one pays little of value will be uploaded. Artists, visual, vocal, and otherwise have to eat. So do programers. So do programing artists.

Suppose I take a copy of 'Great Expectations' off a shelf, stuff it in my bag and hook it out of the bookshop.  Is that stealing or piracy?  'Great Expectations' still exists - millions of copies, it's always in print, it's been filmed, and so on.  I'm not really hurting anyone, am I?  After all, my taking the book doesn't prevent anyone else from reading it.  Charles Dickens is dead, so he's not losing any money.  The publishers, I'm sure, expect a certain amount of loss and plan for it in their annual budgets.  The bookshop owner is insured.

So then, taking a hardbacked novel out of a bookshop without paying doesn't qualify as theft, correct?

Boru

(April 13, 2015 at 7:19 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Why should you pay?  Because it is moral and because if no one pays little of value will be uploaded.  Artists, visual, vocal, and otherwise have to eat.  So do programers.  So do programing artists.

Because they clearly do not already make more than enough to support themselves?  

Because goodness forbid a celebrity does not have enough money to buy his child a private island.

I don't have problems with downloading movies and TV shows because of all the content I've paid for on DVD that has gone bad. The packaging for DVDs is borderline criminal. The packaging often grips them so tightly in the center that they have to be flexed to get them out. This damages the tracks. Then there is the regioning on DVDs and now a lot of them are being coded so they won't play on a computer. When they do shit like that, they're asking to be stolen from.

I pay for music and software

I agree, the movie industry, on average, is simply showing us a big middle finger.

Quote:Because they clearly do not already make more than enough to support themselves?  

Gosh, THERE'S a moral stance - rob from the rich and give to yourself.

Boru

(April 13, 2015 at 7:21 pm)Sionnach Wrote:

(April 13, 2015 at 7:19 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Why should you pay?  Because it is moral and because if no one pays little of value will be uploaded.  Artists, visual, vocal, and otherwise have to eat.  So do programers.  So do programing artists.

Because they clearly do not already make more than enough to support themselves?  

Because goodness forbid a celebrity does not have enough money to buy his child a private island.

So as long as the owner is eating well, it's ok to steal?  ----  Besides, most of us artists visual and otherwise are not all that rich.  Really.

(April 13, 2015 at 7:23 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

Quote:Because they clearly do not already make more than enough to support themselves?  

Gosh, THERE'S a moral stance - rob from the rich and give to yourself.

Boru

Robin Hood did it.

---

Besides, now I watch everything on this site:

http://www.primewire.ag/

Maybe they're stealing? I don't care.

(April 13, 2015 at 7:20 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Suppose I take a copy of 'Great Expectations' off a shelf, stuff it in my bag and hook it out of the bookshop.  Is that stealing or piracy?  'Great Expectations' still exists - millions of copies, it's always in print, it's been filmed, and so on.  I'm not really hurting anyone, am I?  After all, my taking the book doesn't prevent anyone else from reading it.  Charles Dickens is dead, so he's not losing any money.  The publishers, I'm sure, expect a certain amount of loss and plan for it in their annual budgets.  The bookshop owner is insured.

So then, taking a hardbacked novel out of a bookshop without paying doesn't qualify as theft, correct?

Boru

Honestly, a more accurate analogy is taking a copy of Great Expectations, using your iPad to scan each and every page of it, turn it into a PDF and sending a copy of the newly-created PDF scan to someone else. The original book you used doesn't even have to leave the store (although the powers that be at the store may ask questions), but a copy has been made and, given the nature of the internet, there's a very real chance more copies will be made of that copy.

Honestly, the real downside for Filesharing is that, to quote Cracked:

Quote:See, when piracy hit Hollywood, they didn't stop funding blockbusters -- they stopped funding edgy, creative movies. They're going with safer and safer bets.
Piracy did that. We got that ball rolling, and there is no going back. Instead of Reservoir Dogs, we get Jack & Jill ... and you have no idea how deeply sorry I am for that