The pirate bay is/was legal in the country it was hosted in. Think about that for a second.
The US laws don't cover the globe, as much as you might like to see otherwise. And they didn't host just pirated material, artists also uploaded their own albums on there, independent moviemakers used it to host their movies, linux distributions used it to host their ISO files, writers used it to promote their own wares.
And the same goes for hotfile, megaupload and mediafire, they do not just host pirated material, but also genuine files, and they are offering a legal service, storage space in the cloud.
Let me repeat this once again for you: COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT IS NOT STEALING!
Yes, it's illegal, but you don't have to be disingenuous about it and call it something it's not in an attempt to make it even more illegal.
"If I walk up to you on the street and say "hey, can I have a smoke" and you give me one, did I steal it?"
Only if I didn't own the cigarette in the first place.
What happened here was:
BREIN asked the datacenter for a cigarette, and the datacenter grabbed the cigarette the ISP had bought and was smoking and gave it to BREIN.
The head of BREIN also famously bought a confiscated laptop of a hacker from the police.
Technically, the police had no business selling is, so the head of BREIN (Tim Kuijk) essentially stole the laptop from this hacker.
Re: Re: Re: Workarounds to continue what you claim you're NOT doing?
You are so deranged with your diatribes that it's just pure gibberish at this point.
Take a breather, get away from the site and get yourself checked in somewhere. Your kind of nuttiness is not what we can use in the debate here.
And yes we do like debate. We're not all yes-men/women.
But we like to debate on points, not on truthiness, not on conjecture and not on diatribes such as yours.
All the points you bring up are way off base, way off topic, and just sheer lunatic. If that's a courtesy from you, then please stop trying to help us.
It's not about piracy, that's just a talking point, just a narrative. (the sugar to make the medicine go down Congress' throat)
The real issue is about control.
The middlemen of the RIAA- and MPAA-backed labels and studios can't control what gets released to the market anymore, because of the internet.
Indie artists suddenly have about as much opportunities for profiling their works to the public as artists who have signed up with the large corporations.
And these corporations are running scared. They are so fixed on keeping their old jobs, that they don't dare to change their business models to suit the new reality, because that would mean more work for them and possibly less profit. So intent they are on keeping that control, that they are willing to destroy the internet and criminalize the fanbase of their artists.
It's not about piracy, that's just a talking point, just a narrative. (the sugar to make the medicine go down Congress' throat)
The real issue is about control.
The middlemen of the RIAA- and MPAA-backed labels and studios can't control what gets released to the market anymore, because of the internet.
Indie artists suddenly have about as much opportunities for profiling their works to the public as artists who have signed up with the large corporations.
And these corporations are running scared. They are so fixed on keeping their old cushy jobs, that they don't dare to change their business models to suit the new reality more, because that would mean more work for them and possibly less profit. So intent they are on keeping that control, that they are willing to destroy the internet and criminalize the fanbase of their artists.
If the government can prove in court that bigpiracy.com engages in commercial piracy and ingores valid takedown notices, I have no problem with banning Paypal and VISA from serving the site after due process has been observed.
What if, like in the PirateBay's case, their service is completely legal in the country that site is based?
The internet is GLOBAL, and not solely there to serve US interests.
Then why should we care what you think about people downloading stuff for free?
As long as media companies ignore the wants of a potential market (and yes, most of those 'pirates' are still marketable), those media companies are going to lose out.
but that infinitely copyability of those files is also why people view those files as being worth less than physical goods. Ard to your customers it makes no sense to ask more for a product that doesn't cause you any effort to duplicate. Why would I pay more for a digital file compared to for instance a hard-cover book? You have no storage costs, no printing costs, no paper needed, no ink, no glue, etc and bandwidth is cheap.
And perhaps more importantly, the product can't get sold out. In 10 years, people could still buy the same product, which means that the saleability of the product is longer than compared to physical products, which can run out.
Also the 200 million times that the Daily Show and the Colbert Report was watched illegally... (also that number seems quite high, I doubt that 200 million people know about those shows, I guess, since they're pretty much 4-weekly, that they counted all downloads over a year or something.)
But how many of those were from other countries where Viacom is blocking people from watching the Daily Show's own online offerings, thus denying them a legal course?
On the post: Colbert Takes On SOPA
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The US laws don't cover the globe, as much as you might like to see otherwise. And they didn't host just pirated material, artists also uploaded their own albums on there, independent moviemakers used it to host their movies, linux distributions used it to host their ISO files, writers used it to promote their own wares.
And the same goes for hotfile, megaupload and mediafire, they do not just host pirated material, but also genuine files, and they are offering a legal service, storage space in the cloud.
On the post: Colbert Takes On SOPA
Re:
And it's not a black and white world, you can be against piracy AND be against SOPA, as many of us here are.
On the post: Colbert Takes On SOPA
Re: SOPA
I heard Colbert make a similar mistake by saying that his saying was "copywritten", the correct term is "copyrighted".
On the post: Colbert Takes On SOPA
Re: Re:
On the post: Colbert Takes On SOPA
Re: Re:
COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT IS NOT STEALING!
Yes, it's illegal, but you don't have to be disingenuous about it and call it something it's not in an attempt to make it even more illegal.
On the post: Dutch Anti-Piracy Group May Face Legal Charges For Stealing Servers
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Only if I didn't own the cigarette in the first place.
What happened here was:
BREIN asked the datacenter for a cigarette, and the datacenter grabbed the cigarette the ISP had bought and was smoking and gave it to BREIN.
On the post: Dutch Anti-Piracy Group May Face Legal Charges For Stealing Servers
Re: Re: Re: Why no warrent?
On the post: Dutch Anti-Piracy Group May Face Legal Charges For Stealing Servers
Technically, the police had no business selling is, so the head of BREIN (Tim Kuijk) essentially stole the laptop from this hacker.
On the post: As SOPA/PIPA Still Loom, Techies Already Creating Workarounds
Re: Re: Re: Workarounds to continue what you claim you're NOT doing?
Take a breather, get away from the site and get yourself checked in somewhere. Your kind of nuttiness is not what we can use in the debate here.
And yes we do like debate. We're not all yes-men/women.
But we like to debate on points, not on truthiness, not on conjecture and not on diatribes such as yours.
All the points you bring up are way off base, way off topic, and just sheer lunatic. If that's a courtesy from you, then please stop trying to help us.
On the post: As SOPA/PIPA Still Loom, Techies Already Creating Workarounds
Re: Re: Re: Re: Workarounds to continue what you claim you're NOT doing?
On the post: Educators Worried About SOPA/PIPA's Impact On Education
Re: Re: Uhhhh...
On the post: How Much Does File Sharing Really Cost Hollywood?
Re:
On the post: How Much Does File Sharing Really Cost Hollywood?
It's about control
The real issue is about control.
The middlemen of the RIAA- and MPAA-backed labels and studios can't control what gets released to the market anymore, because of the internet.
Indie artists suddenly have about as much opportunities for profiling their works to the public as artists who have signed up with the large corporations.
And these corporations are running scared. They are so fixed on keeping their old jobs, that they don't dare to change their business models to suit the new reality, because that would mean more work for them and possibly less profit. So intent they are on keeping that control, that they are willing to destroy the internet and criminalize the fanbase of their artists.
On the post: How Much Does File Sharing Really Cost Hollywood?
The real issue is about control.
The middlemen of the RIAA- and MPAA-backed labels and studios can't control what gets released to the market anymore, because of the internet.
Indie artists suddenly have about as much opportunities for profiling their works to the public as artists who have signed up with the large corporations.
And these corporations are running scared. They are so fixed on keeping their old cushy jobs, that they don't dare to change their business models to suit the new reality more, because that would mean more work for them and possibly less profit. So intent they are on keeping that control, that they are willing to destroy the internet and criminalize the fanbase of their artists.
On the post: MPAA Pretends To Capitulate On SOPA, Will Offer Changes For 'Legitimate Concerns'
Re: Re: Re:
What if, like in the PirateBay's case, their service is completely legal in the country that site is based?
The internet is GLOBAL, and not solely there to serve US interests.
On the post: MPAA Pretends To Capitulate On SOPA, Will Offer Changes For 'Legitimate Concerns'
Re: Re: Re: Re:
As long as media companies ignore the wants of a potential market (and yes, most of those 'pirates' are still marketable), those media companies are going to lose out.
On the post: The Annotated Version Of Viacom's Employees Begging The Gov't To Censor The Internet To Save SpongeBob
Re: Re: Re: Re:
but that infinitely copyability of those files is also why people view those files as being worth less than physical goods. Ard to your customers it makes no sense to ask more for a product that doesn't cause you any effort to duplicate. Why would I pay more for a digital file compared to for instance a hard-cover book? You have no storage costs, no printing costs, no paper needed, no ink, no glue, etc and bandwidth is cheap.
And perhaps more importantly, the product can't get sold out. In 10 years, people could still buy the same product, which means that the saleability of the product is longer than compared to physical products, which can run out.
On the post: The Annotated Version Of Viacom's Employees Begging The Gov't To Censor The Internet To Save SpongeBob
Re: Re: Re:
You have a pig, I take your pig, you don't have your pig anymore, because I have it now. (This is stealing)
You have a digital file, I make a copy of that file illegally, you still have your file, but now I have your file too. (This is not stealing)
On the post: The Annotated Version Of Viacom's Employees Begging The Gov't To Censor The Internet To Save SpongeBob
Re: Re:
Look, in what reality does stealing mean that there is more copies of a product than before the act:
You have a pig, I take your pig, you don't have your pig anymore, because I have it now.
On the post: The Annotated Version Of Viacom's Employees Begging The Gov't To Censor The Internet To Save SpongeBob
Re: Not endorsing piracy...
But how many of those were from other countries where Viacom is blocking people from watching the Daily Show's own online offerings, thus denying them a legal course?
Next >>