Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all.
Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage") |
|
Post Reply 
|
Page 123 4> |
| Author | ||||
BitchBrew 
Forum Senior Member 
Joined: September 10 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 216 |
 Topic: Download feverPosted: September 14 2005 at 14:25 |
|||
That is not the same thing, let's say peer to peer did not exist, I would'nt go off stealing my cd:s at record shops, I simply wodln't buy them at all, because I wouldn't afford them. An artist doesn't loose money when persons download their music, that wouldn't buy the records if downloading wasn't an possibleity. It's when people who can afford the album starts downloading, that the artist loose money. When i download something I download copies of the data, if you steel a cd player the people who sell it loose money. Ok lets say you would like to have a poster on your wall, but you can't afford the poster, then it is a diffrens between steeling the poster and taking a picture of it which you put on yor wall. Because if you couldn't take the picture you wouldn't steel it. |
||||
 |
||||
|
sonic_assassin
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 29 2004 Location: Devon, UK Status: Offline Points: 157 |
Posted: September 14 2005 at 12:46 |
|||
|
Re: much of the foregoing:
But downloading (whether illegal or not) is NOT being penalised. It's the people who facilitate that process, ie the uploaders, who are getting the RIAA knocking on their doors. |
||||
|
||||
|
chopper
Special Collaborator 
Honorary Collaborator Joined: July 13 2005 Location: Essex, UK Status: Offline Points: 20030 |
Posted: September 14 2005 at 11:26 |
|||
|
Even the top prog bands are at it now - see http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/4238542.s tm
entitled "Rush to download War Child album "  .Edited by chopper |
||||
|
||||
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21206 |
Posted: September 14 2005 at 11:09 |
|||
|
^ music is not a tangible commodity, so different rules apply. The problem is that listening to the music is comparable to eating a cake, or consuming any other "physical" product. If you didn't pay for it, you caused damage to the seller. You did something which he would normally charge you a certain amount of money which HE is free to choose. He created the music, it's his, he owns it. He can decide that listening to that music costs a certain amount of money. Think about it - radio stations and even restaurants or bars have to pay royalties for the music they play. You want to listen - you pay. It's very simple. If you don't pay, you cause financial damage to the creator of the music. Maybe you don't call it "stealing" ... that's fine with me. I 'll just call it "illegal copying" then, which is equal to "stealing" in the eyes of the law. Edited by MikeEnRegalia |
||||
|
||||
|
Poxx
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 03 2005 Location: Denmark Status: Offline Points: 231 |
Posted: September 14 2005 at 10:53 |
|||
|
My point with that analogy is that, it's not the exact code that is protected by the copyright law, it's the general idea that is copyrighted. You can compress, encode, encrypt and burn the cd onto another medium, but it's still protected by copyright law. That is the same thing as having copyright on an opinion or an idea, or the procedure of baking a cake. The digital copyright laws are vague and/or flawed in some areas. Regarding, whether copying is stealing. It is not stealing. The object must be physically deprived/taken away from the original owner, so that he is not in possesion of the object any longer, before it can be called stealing. This is not the case with copying. Is it right or is wrong to download - is it ethical? That's a different story. |
||||
|
||||
|
chopper
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: July 13 2005 Location: Essex, UK Status: Offline Points: 20030 |
Posted: September 14 2005 at 07:59 |
|||
I don't think your cake analogy works. The author of a recipe would probably be on a royalty per book sold (assuming the recipe came from a book). They would not be paid every time someone baked a cake from their recipe. The analogy would be if you borrowed the recipe book (e.g. from a library) and photocopied it before using it. You would then be depriving the author of a royalty that he or she would earn if you had bought a legit copy. |
||||
|
||||
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21206 |
Posted: September 14 2005 at 04:38 |
|||
|
The law agrees with me ... |
||||
|
||||
|
cobb
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 10 2005 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 1149 |
Posted: September 14 2005 at 04:31 |
|||
|
And further to goose's definition- Music is the intellectual property of the composer.
The problem is that the internet changed the rules so fast that there are (were) few social laws pertaining to it. This is why ethics make up such a huge part of any computer studies. The RIAA (and the ARIA in Australia, who recently won a case against Kazaa) is doing its best to change the social aspect of downloading. There have already been a number of landmark decision handed down by the courts. The future probably lies in a comprise between the music associations and the downloaders. But lets be very sure of this- downloading of unsolicited music is illegal (in most countries), in this day and age. now I have to go and fire up sk  Edited by cobb |
||||
|
||||
|
goose
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 4097 |
Posted: September 14 2005 at 04:17 |
|||
I never said downloading (copyrighted music) is the same as theft. What they have in common is that they're both taking something without permission, and both illegal. However, according to the definiton you posted, downloading is theft:
Stealing:
"To take (the property of another) without right or permission."
Property:
"Something tangible or intangible to which its owner has legal title: properties such as copyrights and trademarks."
|
||||
|
||||
|
Citanul
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 14 2005 Location: South Africa Status: Offline Points: 430 |
Posted: September 14 2005 at 04:05 |
|||
From the links you've given Stealing: To take (the property of another) without right or permission. Copying: An imitation or reproduction of an original. By copying music, you are obtaining something without permission. I know the definition above says "take" and not "obtain", but it means almost the same thing. Therefore by copying music, you are in fact stealing. |
||||
|
Be or be not. There is no question. - Yoda, Prince of Denmark
|
||||
|
||||
|
Poxx
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 03 2005 Location: Denmark Status: Offline Points: 231 |
Posted: September 14 2005 at 03:16 |
|||
|
That was an extremely unintelligent answer. Please read my post again, but this time thoroughly. If you still fail to understand the difference between the two terms, and why it is important to differentiate them, then... too bad.
|
||||
|
||||
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21206 |
Posted: September 14 2005 at 02:52 |
|||
|
^ wrong. I recently read an interesting article on the subject and the bottom line was that most young people (who have grown up with the internet) just fail to understand even basic principles ... they think that EVERYTHING is free. When you download something, you're using something without paying for it. Imagine that EVERYBODY stopped buying albums and just downloads them. The record company AND the musicians don't get anything for their work. NOT HURTING ANYBODY? You must be out of your mind. |
||||
|
||||
|
Poxx
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 03 2005 Location: Denmark Status: Offline Points: 231 |
Posted: September 14 2005 at 02:34 |
|||
|
What is your point? You forgot to defend your incorrect statement. The discussion is not whether it is right or wrong to download. Actually, there is no discussion: Copying music is not stealing. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=stealing&db=* http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=copying&db=* It's important to differentiate between the two terms, since stealing directly hurt the original owner of the object. Therefore, it should be punished more severely. In many cases it does not, and the reason for that is illogical copyright laws. |
||||
|
||||
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21206 |
Posted: September 14 2005 at 02:05 |
|||
|
^ Poxx: Of course you are stealing when you download music. |
||||
|
||||
|
goose
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 4097 |
Posted: September 13 2005 at 19:06 |
|||
So? The musicians signed that contract, therefore they're happy for the record company to take what they do in return for promotion.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Poxx
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 03 2005 Location: Denmark Status: Offline Points: 231 |
Posted: September 13 2005 at 18:02 |
|||
You are not stealing by downloading. You are copying information with your own materials. This is the same as when you are baking a chocolate cake from a recipe that isn't created by yourself. You apply the information and the result is an identical chocolate cake. Chocolate cakes taste good. Though, copyright laws works in mysterious ways, and by mysterious I mean, they don't make any sense, but they fuel the pockets of alot of lawyers and record companies. |
||||
|
||||
|
chopper
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: July 13 2005 Location: Essex, UK Status: Offline Points: 20030 |
Posted: September 13 2005 at 11:33 |
|||
I would suggest you talk to Nick Barrett of Pendragon about downloading and explain to him why you think it's okay to deprive him of his royalties. |
||||
|
||||
|
goose
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 4097 |
Posted: September 13 2005 at 11:25 |
|||
...and if you can't afford a CD player, stealing is OK? Why the f**k not?
|
||||
|
||||
|
sonic_assassin
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 29 2004 Location: Devon, UK Status: Offline Points: 157 |
Posted: September 13 2005 at 09:14 |
|||
No reason at all - mainly because no-one gets hassled for Downloading. It's the Uploaders (people who are being good enough to make stuff available to all and sundry) that are being busted by the RIAA - although it tends only to be the "big players" at present. Leeches (people who grab but don't give anything in return) are completely safe at present... Huh. |
||||
|
||||
|
BitchBrew
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 10 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 216 |
Posted: September 13 2005 at 08:29 |
|||
|
If you can't afford to buy a CD, downloading is OK!
WHY THE f**k NOT!? |
||||
|
||||
|
Post Reply
|
Page 123 4> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Download fever
Topic Options
goose wrote:
I can't afford a Ferrari so it must be okay to steal one then!