Hanging Out For Free Is Piracy

Too Much Free Time

from the free-is-bad dept

Wed, Nov 9th 2011 5:30am — Mike Masnick

Joe Betsill alerts us to an an amusing comic from theWAREHOUSE that seems fitting around here:

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: free, invoices, piracy, thewarehouse

70 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

xenomancer (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 5:04am

Do You Need an Invoice?
You heard the man, pay up! I can't patronize you freeloading freetards with complementary 30 second samples forever! If you don't pay me what I want now then you are killing the comment industry!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 5:35am
  
  Re: Do You Need an Invoice?
  You want to make money by mooching off of Mikes awesome articles and commentating on them. Sorry old chap but I'm afraid you'll have to pay a licensing fee and give up all copyright claims for said comments to Mike for all eternity. If you don't then I'm afraid you will have to be sued.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Ninja (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 5:58am
    
    Re: Re: Do You Need an Invoice?
    The comments are public domain, Mike can use them in his public domain articles whenever he wants. But I can see what you did there ;)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - xenomancer (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:00am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Do You Need an Invoice?
      Hahaha, I suppose a "/sarc" may have been advisable.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - el_segfaulto (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:15am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Do You Need an Invoice?
        I'm not sure if it's an actual rule of teh intarwebs, but no matter how obvious the sarcasm, somebody will take it seriously.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 1:57am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Do You Need an Invoice?
        Yep, it is a rule. Can't remember the name though.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        xenomancer (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 10:45am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Do You Need an Invoice?
        Hehe, not 34.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The Mighty Buzzard (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:17am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Do You Need an Invoice?
      For a completely incorrect value of public domain. Mike works in the US and you cannot produce public domain material if it is eligible for copyright in the US. You get the copyright whether you want it or not.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 5:44am

The sound of one hand clapping. The cartoon is a pretty poor attempt to self-justify piracy. Keep up the good work...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Kaden (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 5:51am
  
  Re:
  When all you have is talking points, everything looks like an attempt to justify piracy.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:01am
    
    Re: Re:
    Kaden, the cartoon is a cute way to both play down the idea of piracy, and to play up the "stupidity" of charging for "content", by using something that is not content. It's the typical sort of soft attempt to get a mental shift by those in the middle, by being misleading and mocking the other side's position.
    
    It sucks.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - AJ (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:06am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "by being misleading and mocking the other side's position."
      
      The irony is strong with this one......
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:16am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        It's only ironic to you because you buy into what they are saying. Congrats for being "just another victim".
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        xenomancer (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:20am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "you buy into what they are saying"
        
        Funny, does anyone remember paying anything?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:29am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Are you actually that dense?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        xenomancer (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:49am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I may appear to be a little lighter than igneous rock pulling the bad joke that I did, but 20 adult elephants barely balances a spoonful of the nutronium residing in your head. Please either learn to chuckle rather than get personal or find a real, factual reason for being such an execrable malcontent.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Atkray (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:07am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Ah leave him alone, he's just upset because he couldn't figure out how to say the comic is FUD and Mike is a slimeball pirate.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:14am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Unlike you guys, I don't feel the need to repeat the obvious at every turn.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:31am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Funny I'm pretty sure you are the troll that keeps coming here day after day saying the exact same BS every time.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:33am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        true, you tend to represent the oblivious more than the obvious.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:44am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Victim of clarity?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - weneedhelp (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:21am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:The irony is strong with this one......
        But the brain is weak.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Kaden (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:10am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      So you don't see it as a commentary on how Big Content slathers the grim specter of piracy on top of every spurious cash grab initiative in an attempt to harness moral outrage as a societal lubricant?
      
      Because that's what I see.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The eejit (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:21am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      It's not a cartoon, therefore your argument is invalid. Now pay up for posting here!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:43am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Stupid is believing that something imaterial without form can be content.
      
      I ask myself why musicians have to pay other musicians, if someone does a cover he is investing in that music, he is taking somebody else expressions and making his own, working with it and he has to pay the first one?
      
      Why?
      
      Can restaurants charge other restaurants for using their recipes? can Rolland charge musicians for making music with their content? every musician should pay the manufacturers of sound equipment shouldn't they?
      
      Musicians can't possibly expect to use somebody else work to make a profit and don't pay anything for what people have done before right?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:17am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "I ask myself why musicians have to pay other musicians, if someone does a cover he is investing in that music, he is taking somebody else expressions and making his own, working with it and he has to pay the first one?"
        
        The simple answer is that without the original work, the secondary work does not exist. It would be a remake of silence, which is what we get all the time for free.
        
        The rest of your recipe and sound equipment rants only goes to show how hard you are working to obscure the obvious.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:24am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Then nothing would be ever made since in your head everything needs to come from somewhere, but that is not what it happens is it?
        
        Now, why should you get things for free without paying the people who enable you?
        
        According to yourself without work done before there would never be future work is that not right?
        
        So can there be musicians without instruments? Rolland, Yamaha should collect money from the use of their property no?
        
        Why manufacturers of musical instruments that enable musicians everywhere to play for large crowds not paid by their work?is their property lesser in importance somehow to the creation of imaginary property?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Greevar (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:35am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Everything is built on what came before. That's why nobody should have the right to claim "ownership" of any intangible art. Art comes from what people have done in the past and thus, it belongs all of humanity equally. Nobody should be restricted from copying, altering, remixing, etc. of old ideas into new expressions.
        
        "All art is derivative. There is no form of art that is totally original... 'originality' is a modern art construct... a silly concession to marketing concerns." - Paul deMarrais
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:30am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        The rest of your recipe and sound equipment rants only goes to show how hard you are working to obscure the obvious.
        
        The same can be said about your little rant about how artists create something and need to be paid, everybody needs to be paid for their work, not extort others that do the work or the same work, I don't see carpenters suing each other for doing the exact same things do you?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        btrussell (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:59am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Nope. And since we haven't mastered growing straight trees with straight grain, it takes skill, knowledge and creativity to build.
        
        Shelter is more valuable to me than "Give Me Shelter" is.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        ethorad (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 9:16am
        
        Unauthorised silence?
        It would be a remake of silence, which is what we get all the time for free.
        
        Actually, it would be an unauthorised version of 4'33".
        
        John Cage doesn't get nearly enough in royalties for that piece!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:15am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I don't think it sucks, I think it is an accurate portrait of the parasitic nature of copyright.
      
      The real thieves are artists that don't do the work anymore and keep asking the people who do to pay them.
      
      Why should any musician lose his job at a bar because the owner was threatened by a collection agency?
      
      Why should anybody who works in front of a crowd for 8 or more hours a day have to pay anything to some dude he wouldn't even be allowed to get close to it?
      
      Copyright parasites don't work they extort money from those who do and threaten their own fans.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Ninja (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:58am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Nothing that copyright trolls don't do regularly.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 5:59am
  
  Re:
  It's pretty obvious what you're doing with your other hand, boy.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:01am
  
  Re:
  "The cartoon is a pretty poor attempt to self-justify piracy."
  
  Come up with something better.
  ...funny, I don't see anything...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Bengie, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:11am
  
  Re:
  Anything you every hear or see is content. PAY UP!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:14am
    
    Re: Re:
    See #25
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:36am

This is hilarious, because the webcomic is drawn in more or less the same style as Cyanide and Happiness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:42am

Sorry, but standing next to someone, creating nothing, and then providing an invoice for payment does not comprise the creation of "an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Infamous Joe (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:54am
  
  Re:
  What if I was standing next to him, acting out an original play, or telling jokes, or singing a song?
  
  Did I still create nothing?
  
  I needs me more protection for my art!!!11eleven
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:13am
    
    Re: Re:
    It helps to understand the definition of terms used in our copyright laws. Definitions can be found at 17 USC 101.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:17am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      my name is anonymous coward and I don't know how to separate between reality and something mocking reality.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - The Infamous Joe (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:21am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I was sure the '!!11eleven' would have given it away.
        
        Alas, some people see only what they want to see.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Groove Tiger (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:55am
  
  Re:
  Perhaps the same could be said about all artists!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Bengie, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:19am
  
  Re:
  "creating nothing"
  
  He did create something, he talked. Unless you're arguing against audio not being copyrightable, but then music couldn't be copyrighted.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:29am
    
    Re: Re:
    At the risk of repeating myself, read 17 USC 101. Unlesa and until an original work of authorship is "fixed", copyright law does not apply. Fixation is a condition precedent to securing a copyright.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The Devil's Coachman (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:45am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Is that "fixed" as in what vets do to dogs and cats?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - btrussell (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:09am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      The copyright system is "fixed."
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Bengie, 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:16am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      The human rain is just a computer. It's dynamically "fixed" as it's recorded into memory.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - ethorad (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 9:12am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      So can we video rock concerts without breaching copyright?
      
      Afterall performances by their very nature are not fixed. They may be performing something which they have a fixed version of, but the live version will have differences - plus in videoing you are adding creative decisions about framing the shots etc.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - John Fenderson (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 4:09pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        So can we video rock concerts without breaching copyright?
        
        An interesting question. On the face of it, it seems the answer is "yes".
        
        However, every concert/play/movie ticket I've ever seen has terms attached to it that forbid recording. It may not be a copyright violation, but it would be breach of contract.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:34am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I agree that it is an interesting question if "fixation" has not taken place prior to or during the concert (see Title 17, Section 101 and the "transmission" provision associated with "fixation").
        
        While this is a highly improbable situation, it is nevertheless a possibility that does make this an interesting question as you note.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 9:43am
  
  Re:
  Sorry, but standing next to someone, creating nothing, and then providing an invoice for payment does not comprise the creation of "an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression".
  
  I fear your sense of humor needs recalibration.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- xenomancer (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:34pm
  
  Re:
  What about the invoice? Clearly some creativity went into the numbers printed on it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jose_X, 18 Nov 2011 @ 9:45pm
  
  Re:
  >> Sorry, but standing next to someone, creating nothing, and then providing an invoice for payment does not comprise the creation of "an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression".
  
  Is promoting a narrow interpretation of "tangible medium of expression" and of "authorship" that excludes the observer's brain your way of saying that you don't value the work, creativity, spontaneity, privacy sharing, and inspiration that results from hanging out with someone else? Do you really want to go on record as saying you don't value the creator's expression and impression on his/her audience's mind and the work required on his/her part?
  
  What if the audience then goes on to create a work that derives ideas and expressions arrived at with the help of that valuable hanging out moment? What if the observer records the moment and makes lots of money afterward? Are you saying that you think the original creator is not entitled to a cut of the profits or injunctive relief?
  
  What kind of anon ac troll are you!
  
  It's because of fake trolls like yourself that in this day and age we still have many slaves performing and creating purely and exclusively for the sake of others without receiving a dime in compensation.
  
  It's as if you don't value people's time or think creativity falls from a tree.
  
  Hanging-outers have been exploited for far too long, and if our Congress depends on the opinion of people like yourself, it will be years still before this injustice has been corrected.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:16am

First you pay...
http://mimiandeunice.com/2011/11/08/careful-i/

...then you suffer.
http://mimiandeunice.com/2011/11/09/careful-ii/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TheOldFart (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:36am

"I want my twooo dolllarsss..."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:58am

derp
what a dumb comic.. of course anything that heralds piracy mikey is all over.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- btrussell (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:20am
  
  Re: derp
  It says piracy is wrong.
  
  You don't think you should be able to come here and post for free do you? It costs money to run a site. I know it isn't being run by Gene Simmons or Angelina Jolie, but it still costs money.
  
  Don't be a jerk just because you don't like the content. If the price is too high, don't use that to justify your actions.
  Just quit coming here.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:35am

Isn't the cartoon pointing out that culture being shared is piracy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Greevar (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:45am
  
  Re:
  Pretty much.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:42am

Why IP laws are so bad:

Quote:
But many of the technologies that these patents protect are so abstruse or vague that companies may end up running afoul of the law without even knowing it, said Bijal V. Vakil, a partner at law firm White & Case in Palo Alto, Calif.

"It's become a virtually unmanageable task to go and see if you have the freedom to operate," he said. "Procedurally it would be impossible to check all of (the valid patents) - even large companies can't afford to do that."

Source: http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-11-apple-legal-war-android.html

Even science dedicated blogs are noticing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:44am

so ho long till someone is sued for being able to hear a concert outside the venue and not having a valid ticket?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Greevar (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:46am
  
  Re:
  The THIEVES!!! String them up!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bob, 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:47am

Real content providers actually put a price at the door
Real content creators give content away all the time. When they want to charge, though, they put a price tag on it and make sure that the customer knows it's there. That's just how business is done. No one sends an invoice after the fact.

Sigh. The irony is that the web comic author is actually trying to monetize what is given for free-- but with a legit form of business. There are t-shirts, coffee mugs and over five pages of stuff all available for a price.

I wish the author well because it's tough to run a business. I just wish the author had some sympathy for the other creators who are trying to do the same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chosen Reject (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 12:07pm
  
  Re: Real content providers actually put a price at the door
  The creator of the comic gets the digital age though. He has an infinite good that he gives away (the comic) and sells scarce goods that are not easily reproducible. He uses the infinite good to increase the value of the scarce good. Few if any people would buy this coffee mug for $17, but he uses the free infinite good to make that mug more valuable than a plain one that sells for $4.
  
  No one is saying that creators shouldn't get paid. You either don't understand the arguments being made here, or you are being deliberately obtuse to further some agenda of yours.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 3:08pm
  
  Re: Real content providers actually put a price at the door
  So you admit that not everything needs a price tag and that some things drive the sales of other things.
  
  Well dumbass welcome to the radio era or the television era you are just late to the game just about a 100 years or so but you will catch up I'm sure.
  
  Now please can you point me to the nearest website of a musician so I can rip his music from his own website and have him closed for inducing piracy.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 10:54am

It will always be free of charge to hang out with me. So long as you don't mind the annoying ads I have on my sleeves...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 3:04pm
  
  Re:
  I prefer to broadcast the ads.
  http://www.trueguitarist.com/guitar-t-shirt-that-plays-like-a-guitar/
  http://www.thinkgeek.co m/tshirts-apparel/interactive/a5bf/
  "A shirt with a built-in sound effects player"
  
  Or use fabric displays LoL
  http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/gadgets/high-tech-gadgets/fabric-display6.htm
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
MPAA RIAA sucks, 9 Nov 2011 @ 3:09pm

anal leakage
The last line should read "And pirating content, along with child pornography, is wrong." Then if you argue against their point, you must be for child pornography.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]