"You are wrong and have made my point precisely about morals being warped by 'illegal filesharing'."
Actually, it'd be more correct to say copyright warped morality. It is only in the last few hundred years that we have felt we have the right to restrict coping.
"Hopefully you never have a really good idea or make a product that other people can just copy, then perhaps you might have a different opinion."
If you think creating worthwhile content would affect viewpoints on IP you've clearly never checked up on the free software/free culture(anti-ip) movements. Do you honestly believe they could have gotten where they are today without at least reasonably talented people backing them?
Or the free software movement. There's a whole league of content that would still be created regardless of whether artificial scarcity of digital works can be enforced or not.
You've never heard of collector's items? Official merchandise will always have more value than a unofficial reproduction.
This is especially true in the fashion industry. You'll find plenty of people who prefer the more expensive originals than the off brand knock-offs.(even when the materials are of the same quality)
"Looks like more and more musicians are realizing that fighting file sharing doesn't make sense, but learning to embrace it has tremendous benefits. Maybe, one of these days, the record labels will figure this out as well."
Having a label to distribute your music would be pointless when it's already legal to share music over the internet. So how does a label benefit from this when they're no longer relevant?
"So what if we enter a depression? Westerners will start to choose and pay $0. Take the free music, but NOT go to the concert. Not buy loooooots of t-shirts. Not buy the signed book.
How does CwF + RtB hold up in an era of low or no disposable income?"
Same as any other entertainment business model would do in a depression. Very, very poorly.
Re: Theft is always illegal; copying is sometimes illegal
But 'something is taken and the original owner no longer has it' isn't the standard we're using. In explaining the difference between copying and theft it is always implied that there is a lack of permission.
So it's 'something is taken without consent of the original owner and the owner no longer has it'.
"According to a Justice of the Supreme Court, unlawful infringement is theft."
Quote please? I have posted two quotes that say that copyright is for advancement of the public good, meaning the law is of a regulatory nature as opposed to a property law.(Thus infringement != theft)
Re: Re: Re: Re: AC (please use the subject line, huh?)
"That is sort of what file sharing is like, if enough people do it, everyone thinks it is fine - but it isn't."
Everyone thinks their beliefs are the be all end all of morality - but they aren't. This is a big problem on techdirt as both sides think "my view are right and anyone who disagrees must be evil"
On the post: Attacks On File Sharing Simply Drive People Further Underground
Re: Re: Re: Attacks on File Sharing
Actually, it'd be more correct to say copyright warped morality. It is only in the last few hundred years that we have felt we have the right to restrict coping.
On the post: Attacks On File Sharing Simply Drive People Further Underground
Re: Re: Re: Attacks on File Sharing
If you think creating worthwhile content would affect viewpoints on IP you've clearly never checked up on the free software/free culture(anti-ip) movements. Do you honestly believe they could have gotten where they are today without at least reasonably talented people backing them?
On the post: Attacks On File Sharing Simply Drive People Further Underground
Re: Attacks on File Sharing
True, but copying is not stealing. With theft, the owner no longer has the item in question. Copying creates a new item based off the existing one.
On the post: Attacks On File Sharing Simply Drive People Further Underground
But then they'd have to admit....
On the post: AT&T Sues Verizon Over 'There's A Map For That' Ad Campaign
Damn those pirates
Off with their heads!
On the post: Results From Our CwF+RtB Business Model Experiment
Re: Re: Re:
You'd think people would have learned by now that insulting others is not the best way to argue. Have fun being ignored.
On the post: Gershwin Heirs Fight Over Copyright Royalties
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Property Rights.
On the post: MPAA Tells The FCC: If We Don't Stop Piracy, The Internet Will Die
Guess they never heard of creative commons
On the post: Zazzle Sued Because Twilight Fans Like Making Their Own Merchandise
Re: Re: Re:
This is especially true in the fashion industry. You'll find plenty of people who prefer the more expensive originals than the off brand knock-offs.(even when the materials are of the same quality)
On the post: AP Convinces Newspaper That Watermark Will Stop Mythical Evil Copiers
Watermarks are worthess because of how easy it is to remove them
On the post: More Musicians Realizing File Sharing Isn't Evil; Shakira, Norah Jones, Nelly Furtado Say It's Ok
Re: Re: Wait, what?
Again, internet/radio/word of mouth/advertising companies take care of that. Actual record labels would be unnecessary.
It's why they attack file sharing with such vitriol.
On the post: More Musicians Realizing File Sharing Isn't Evil; Shakira, Norah Jones, Nelly Furtado Say It's Ok
Wait, what?
Having a label to distribute your music would be pointless when it's already legal to share music over the internet. So how does a label benefit from this when they're no longer relevant?
On the post: Pro-Stronger Copyright Propaganda Shows Up In Canadian Press
Mr. coward takes the fox news approch to debate
On the post: The Fact That Anyone Can Publish Means More Of The Good Stuff... And Yes, More Of The Bad Stuff
The problem with this article
For example, I hate twilight, but to someone else it might be the best thing ever. So statements on the ratio of good-to-bad are meaningless.
On the post: World Of Goo Tries A Donation Model, Publishes Results
Re: New Debate
How does CwF + RtB hold up in an era of low or no disposable income?"
Same as any other entertainment business model would do in a depression. Very, very poorly.
On the post: So Much For That 'Education' Campaign: Fewer And Fewer Swedes Think File Sharing Is 'Theft'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Theft is always illegal; copying is sometimes illegal
I should have phrased this better. I meant that theft should not be defined in terms where the owner loses nothing.
On the post: So Much For That 'Education' Campaign: Fewer And Fewer Swedes Think File Sharing Is 'Theft'
Re: Re: Re: Theft is always illegal; copying is sometimes illegal
That's a poor definition, if the owner loses absolutely nothing then there shouldn't be a problem at all.
"Again, are you and Mike really trying to say that theft ONLY involves physical goods?"
No. certain monetary assets aren't physical, but you can still use up those assets. Therefor they can be stolen if someone poses as you.
On the post: So Much For That 'Education' Campaign: Fewer And Fewer Swedes Think File Sharing Is 'Theft'
Re: Theft is always illegal; copying is sometimes illegal
So it's 'something is taken without consent of the original owner and the owner no longer has it'.
On the post: Is Morality Even A Question In Copyright?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Quote please? I have posted two quotes that say that copyright is for advancement of the public good, meaning the law is of a regulatory nature as opposed to a property law.(Thus infringement != theft)
On the post: So Much For That 'Education' Campaign: Fewer And Fewer Swedes Think File Sharing Is 'Theft'
Re: Re: Re: Re: AC (please use the subject line, huh?)
Everyone thinks their beliefs are the be all end all of morality - but they aren't. This is a big problem on techdirt as both sides think "my view are right and anyone who disagrees must be evil"
Next >>