Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
from the gear-reactions dept
This week, almost all of the top comments came in response to the various posts about our Copying Is Not Theft gear. First, it's an anonymous commenter who won the top spot on the insightful side by examining the root of the rage that came in response to the shirt:
The problem is...
People assume the statement "Copying is not theft" is akin to saying: "Copying is not wrong".
What they refuse to see or admit is that theft and copyright infringement are different things - the copyright-maximalist propaganda has done its job well.
It's all rather sad, really... that people have come to assume that copying is somehow as bad (or worse?) than stealing. It's almost incomprehensible that we've reached this point.
In second place, we've got Go5 with a creator's perspective:
I'm a creator. And I collaborate closely with other creators. Our stuff gets copied all the time.
There's even one guy who word-for-word, shot-for-shot, copies lots of our content, in Chinese, within hours of release. I appreciate his perseverance. Our stats prove we get more traffic with him than without.
Thanks to the internet, the whole English-speaking world is our market. Copying is what happens when you create in a public arena.
Sometimes it's flattering, usually it's just someone trying to cash in. Occasionally there's a useful insight into our product or process.
Altogether, copying might account for a few bucks of revenue we'd otherwise receive. Is this "stealing?" Nope. First, the copy doesn't stop anyone from seeing our original, in fact it often drives them to us so we get the revenue (plus SEO) anyway. Second, copies increase the appetite for our work and the venues to promote it, both vastly more valuable than a few extra views.
Creators' jobs are to be unique and relevant. I'd be worried if we weren't being copied.
For editor's choice on the insightful side, just for a change of pace and because it fits so well with the last comment, we're going to grab a comment from our Facebook page, where Dariusz G. Jagielski shared another creator's perspective:
I am a game developer. Working on my first indie game under nickname of "Darkhog". I won't tell you what it is as I don't want to spam Techdirt. Use google if you want to get to it. It's on TigForums.
Anyway, the thing is that even though I intend to sell this game, I don't care about people copying it if they can't afford it or their stupid government banned it (happened before to totally innocent games such as Pokemon). I don't intend even to try to "protect" it (as in, putting expensive, invasive, broken already anyway and potentially damaging DRM, a.k.a. Denuvo or any other kind of DRM).
Because DRM is bullshit and copying is not theft. Filesharers who will like it, will buy it, jerks wouldn't buy it anyway just to spite me and people who can't buy it because of their financial situation and like it will spread the word about game which will lead to more legitimate sales. Let the games begin.
(If you want to check out his game, you can find it here here.)
Next, we pivot away from the Copying Is Not Theft gear briefly, for a response from Anon E. Mous to AT&T's attacks on Google Fiber, supposed beneficiary of "government favoritism":
Gotta love the irony here. We have a AT&T VP criticizing Google for it's short comings when AT&T's own failure have been going on for years with failure to deploy and even bring better broadband services to various states.
Meanwhile this AT&T VP is forgetting is they and other providers teamed up to deny Google access to their poles, and have gone to great lengths to get cities, and state governments to pass stautes that would thwart competitiors and limit what municipalities could do on their own to bring a company like Google into build out in their town/city.
So it's more than a little rich that the AT&T VP is knocking Google when AT&T history isnt exactly a beacon of light. All it shows is how much of an irritant Google was to them in the cities and states where AT&T had to actual do something to compete with another provider.
Not to worry though I am sure AT&T will continue to pillage the consumers pockets while doing the least possible in the way of improvements and satisfying the customer
Over on the funny side, the first place winner is another anonymous commenter, this time with an excellent quip in response to James Comey's request for an "adult conversation" about encryption:
So, Comey wants an adult conversation. What adult will he choose to represent him in this conversation?
For second place, we return one last time to the Copying Is Not Theft campaign, where aethercowboy zeroed in on the irony of the anger:
I wonder where all these people got the idea that copying was theft. Do you think they came up with that idea on their own?
For editor's choice on the funny side, we start out with an election debate where the assertion was made that Bush, Obama and both Clintons are "cancers". Regardless of how you feel about any/all of those politicians, you've got to tip your hat to this anonymous response:
That is plainly not true.
Yes, Bush was a Cancer.
But Bill Clinton and Obama were both Leos, and Hillary is a Scorpio.
Finally, after always-on PDF DRM was found screwing over consumers, Underprepared Hiker composed a piece of short fiction:
There I was stranded in the Alaskan wilderness freezing, I managed to gather up some sticks to make a fire but I had no idea how to make a fire.
No big deal I thought and grabbed my smartphone and opened up my copy of "Wilderness Survival Guide" only to be presented with some stupid message about how I had to be on the Internet to read it! I mean WTF, the time I need this e-book the most and it will not open!?!?!?!K!@#
So I yelled as loud as I could "F$*# you DRM!" fortunately some mountain man heard me and guided me to safety.
Thank god my e-book had DRM, without it I'd still be sitting there next to my fire following the books directions of "when lost, stay put, help will come"
Thank you DRM, you saved my life!
That's all for this week, folks!
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
Reader Comments
The First Word
“I appreciate linking to my RPG Maker project that is on hiatus, but...
...it's not the game I was talking about. The real game I'm working on is there: https://forums.tigsource.com/index.php?topic=45904.0made the First Word by Leigh Beadon
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Of course, none of those forms of copying are theft either — but I do think they are wrong to varying degrees (and in many cases the analogy to theft, while still incorrect, is actually much much closer than with run-of-the-mill piracy).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sources?
I'm just in a mood to read stories like those and then get all self-righteous about Big Copyright Being Thieves & Stuff.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Sources?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I appreciate linking to my RPG Maker project that is on hiatus, but...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I appreciate linking to my RPG Maker project that is on hiatus, but...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I appreciate linking to my RPG Maker project that is on hiatus, but...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Situations in which it's notably wrong
For example, copying and republishing without proper attribution is plagiarism.
Which is wrong.
But it's not theft.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
I'm confused by that.
Exhibit A: 4 year old steals a lollipop.
Exhibit B: Starving parent steals some bread to feed family
Exhibit C: Multinational copies small developer's designs, reinterprets old and unrelated patent to cover designs and prevent small developer from selling it.
So A and B are more wrong than C???
Theft is not always wrong. Copying is not always wrong. Doesn't mean they line up well in a comparison because theft and copying are not the same.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I appreciate linking to my RPG Maker project that is on hiatus, but...
I know your stance on stuff like that (and normally would agree with you not doing such thing), but I just don't want it DMCA'd or worse.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I appreciate linking to my RPG Maker project that is on hiatus, but...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: I appreciate linking to my RPG Maker project that is on hiatus, but...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I appreciate linking to my RPG Maker project that is on hiatus, but...
I dunno, sometimes such games take off, and make it To The Moon ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Copying TANGIBLES may not be theft...
Nearly every example given is a tangible item- lollipops for example. But if the expression itself is the item that is copied then copying IS theft. If I write a song or choreograph a dance, by copying you have stolen without taking anything tangible. Wrong/right aside, it is theft. I'm aware of the arguments that 'recording groups are bad', 'copyrights are wrong', 'promotion is good at the end', but I don't buy it here. If someone else sings my song or dances my dance, then how do you argue that is not theft?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Copying TANGIBLES may not be theft...
What would be theft of an idea is to take it, claim it as your own, and prevent others from including the creator from using it. Which is something Makerbot, Disney, sony BMG, and so many others have done. The natural function of an idea is to be copied, and enrich everyone. That is the purpose of copyright, to delay the free copying so that the creator might extract value to promote the creation of further works.
As to your examples, where has a dance been copyrighted? And have you never heard of covers? Did you steal from the hill sisters(or sony, or whoever) when you sang happy birthday as a child? What harm was done? What was stolen?Is singing the national anthem theft? Is it theft to sing a jingle you heard on TV, and if so why?
An idea is different from an item, ideas have no form, a near infinite number of them can exist. They have no real form.
Theft requires you to prove that something was yours, and that you no longer have it. What has been stolen from you in me singing your song? Where did it go? It most certainly did not suddenly appear in my pocket(unless it's lint(in which case I'd be happy to post you replacement lint)).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Sources?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Copying TANGIBLES may not be theft...
There are many examples of copyrighted dances. Google Martha Graham and what happened after her death.
"A copy is not a lost sale' is not a fact. It is a nice statement.
"The natural function of an idea is to be copied"?! I have no words...
Playing the national anthem is also invalid.That song is not protected.
If you play my song in the privacy of your home, I have no issues. If you play it at a public venue and represent it as yours, I would say that is theft.
As previously stated -Theft and harm can be mutually exclusive.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Copying TANGIBLES may not be theft...
No, quite the opposite. Wrong/right aside, it is NOT theft.
That's the point. You can certainly still say some forms of copying are wrong — but they are still entirely distinct from theft.
You ask "how do you argue that it's not theft" but, well, we don't really have to argue it - it's pretty clear that it's not the same thing. How do you argue that it IS theft? If someone sings your song or dances your dance, you still have the song or the dance - they haven't taken it away from you. They copied it, they didn't steal it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Copying TANGIBLES may not be theft...
But doesn't that right there demonstrate one of the many ways in which copying is so different from theft?
After all, you wouldn't say "if you steal my car and drive it in your back yard, I have no issues. If you steal my car and drive it on the public streets, it's theft" — no, you would be equally deprived of the car and equally stolen from in either circumstance.
Copying doesn't necessarily harm or effect you in any way - in fact you can be copied and not even know about it. Only under very specific circumstances can it be said to cause any harm, and even then the harm is almost impossible to quantify. That's a very, very different situation from theft of property.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Going viral now [was Re: Re: Sources?]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: I appreciate linking to my RPG Maker project that is on hiatus, but...
Can't you link to both games? Pleeeeease?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Copying TANGIBLES may not be theft...
As to no words. Precisely.
National anthems can be protected under copyright.
I don't think you and I are using the same definition of theft. "a : the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it" Merriam Websters web dictionary. That's my definition. Would you mind defining yours so we can work out a comprimise?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Sources?
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140406/07212626819/sony-youtube-take-down-sintel-blende rs-open-source-creative-commons-crowdfunded-masterpiece.shtml
What Sintel is about:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101002/20174711259/open-source-animated-movie-shows-what-c an-be-done-today.shtml
The monopolists also say something is fair use, and then stab creators in the back to steal their money if they consider it "too good". Axenar comes to mind. And that is even after they throws away the canon themselves.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110718/01052415122/star-trek-age-intellectual-propert y.shtml
The monopolists also attacks entire systems where creators can publish without the industries thumb screws. Kim Dotcom and his plan to give almost the entire profit directly to the creators comes to mind, and the monopolists and the US regime did harm.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150719/07501231690/even-if-you-think-kim-dotcom-is-guilty-a s-sin-us-government-stealing-his-assets-should-concern-you.shtml
And take down his album, on his own site
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140903/13120828406/record-labels-issue-takedown-to-take-kim- dotcoms-album-down-his-own-site.shtml
The present copyright system is harmful to creators. And to the populace. And to humanity.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
They have not been removed from you nor have you been denied their use or enjoyment. If someone else sings your song or dances your dance and announces that they are the creator thereof, and claims copyright over them, thereby denying you the credit (and possibly the revenues) for creating them and the right to use them for your own purposes, you have indeed been robbed.
Until such time as you are denied the use of a particular item, you have not been robbed.
Copyright terms are limited for precisely this reason: infringement occurs when someone else usurps your monopoly privilege to make money from distributing copies of your performance. If I sit in a restaurant singing a song you wrote, does infringement take place if I fail to get a licence from you? This kind of thing happens every day. Good luck with collecting the fees you think you're due from the singing public.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Copying TANGIBLES may not be theft...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What they refuse to see or admit is that theft and copyright infringement are different things - the copyright-maximalist propaganda has done its job well.
It's all rather sad, really... that people have come to assume that copying is somehow as bad (or worse?) than stealing. It's almost incomprehensible that we've reached this point.
First you say people insist that copying is theft. Then you say it is somehow bad than stealing. Those two comments contradict each other. You can't have it both ways, if people consider it theft, how can it be worse than theft?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I appreciate linking to my RPG Maker project that is on hiatus, but...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: I appreciate linking to my RPG Maker project that is on hiatus, but...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Copying TANGIBLES may not be theft...
Actually that would be plagiarism, which is a completely different thing that pretty much everyone here would be strongly against. But it's a different topic altogether. Simply copying, even if infringing, is not plagiarism. Nobody is downloading a film or song and then claiming it's theirs. Very few are brave/stupid enough to publicly perform someone else's song and claim it's their own.
[ link to this | view in thread ]