| reply to funny
Re: yes retards everywhere advertisment ITALIAN926's reply is a typical example of not understanding a free market and/or the uselessness of copyrights.
For an artist there is no bigger joy than being copied. Almost always the originator wins big.
After living in Asia you understand first hand. People constantly pirate media, but this in turn makes you famous. Guess what happens when you put on a show. People are busting down the doors and paying good money to see your performance in person. |
|
| lol@ "free market"
You are one funny dude. I guess shoplifting is a good thing as well, YA THIEF |
|
4 edits | It gets kind of silly when people start making comparisons with Murder, Shoplifting, etc...
I don't blame you for ignoring the post, logic is hard to argue with.
We have very little evidence that copyrights actually DO much of anything. Intellectual property protects very few jobs and creates even fewer. In fact its very likely they stifle production and normal healthy avenues of a true free economy. |
|
| Shoplifting is a problem? shouldnt clothing designers and manufacturers feel admired?
Logic? Here ya go....
Theft is theft, end of story. Live your life with morals, at least try. |
|
|
|
| Its immoral to copy?
What a curious philosophy. Personally I think "making" scarcity by way of politicians and ideas like yours represent much more of a moral failing. |
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by DataRiker: Personally I think "making" scarcity by way of intellectual property is much more of a moral failing.
As do all people who don't like to pay for things they want.
--
»www.mittromney.com/s/repeal-and-···bamacare
»www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to DataRiker
Youre really out there bro.
You know what? Youre right, theres nothing wrong with it. The entire industry exists to entertain you FREE OF CHARGE. Movie theaters should always be free admission, DVD's should be manufactured and circulated for free, and people should be able to watch any show or movie, over an internet connection, FREE.
Maybe if you were a Cinematographer, Actor, Musician, Key Grip, Camera Operator, or any of the hundreds of other jobs that rely on PAYING CUSTOMERS, you would feel differently. So go ahead, live in your fantasy-land and continue to believe that you downloading "American Reunion" starring Jason Biggs tonight on Pirate Bay has no impacts on people, and the economy. |
|
| reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:As do all people who don't like to pay for things they want.
When something is not scarce and you can copy it unbeknownst to anyone else, I don't think you have much of an argument. |
|
| reply to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:You know what? Youre right, theres nothing wrong with it. The entire industry exists to entertain you FREE OF CHARGE. Movie theaters should always be free admission, DVD's should be manufactured and circulated for free, and people should be able to watch any show or movie, over an internet connection, FREE.
Maybe if you were a Cinematographer, Actor, Musician, Key Grip, Camera Operator, or any of the hundreds of other jobs that rely on PAYING CUSTOMERS, you would feel differently. So go ahead, live in your fantasy-land and continue to believe that you downloading American Reunion tonight on Pirate Bay has no impacts on people, and the economy.
Your still stuck on that old tune.
Asia has a THRIVING entertainment industry which is much more vibrant than our own. They do this all without copyrights.
You see much more emphasis on live performances, which require just as much support ( I would think even more) than our Hollywood centric based model.
The sky is falling argument is just not true. |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to DataRiker
Yes it does Mr. Logic, because if it was IMPOSSIBLE for you to STEAL IT, you would have paid for it ! So , you get to watch/listen to it for free on Pirate Bay, the industry raises their damn prices to subsidize the loss of revenue, and I get to pay more.
So heres logic, YOU are stealing from ME. |
|
| Just like I though. Not even a single counterpoint. Zero.
Logic always wins. |
|
 NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9
 ·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:said by DataRiker: Personally I think "making" scarcity by way of intellectual property is much more of a moral failing.
As do all people who don't like to pay for things they want. I never pirated for lack of affordability, only for lack of availability. I don't pirate now because the stuff I would have pirated is available here, and now.
I despise the Entertainment Industry for being "Robber Barons", but I don't try to "punish" them by infringement. I deny them their income legally: I just don't buy their "stuff".
I have probably spent as much on entertainment in the last seventeen years as in the seventeen years before. But probably around 90% less on MAFIAA properties in the last seventeen years than the previous seventeen years.
The MAFIAA doesn't have a Monopoly, and I am not supporting them.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by NormanS:I despise the Entertainment Industry for being "Robber Barons", but I don't try to "punish" them by infringement. I deny them their income legally: I just don't buy their "stuff".
No problem at all with that method of exercising your free market rights. That is how it should be done and does have an effect on sellers if more would follow your lead.
--
»www.mittromney.com/s/repeal-and-···bamacare
»www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care |
|
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9 Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:Yes it does Mr. Logic, because if it was IMPOSSIBLE for you to STEAL IT, you would have paid for it !
I detect a flawed premise; possibly of the "Straw Man" variety. My philosophy is simple: If it isn't worth paying for, it isn't worth stealing.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to DataRiker
Then learn to speak Chinese and move. Until then , follow the rules, laws, and regulations of THIS country.
I truly hope that you, and all the rest of the losers on this site get served bro. Somehow, someway, I hope it happens, and youd get to explain your "logic" to a judge.
Im done. |
|
| Copyright infringement is not a criminal act.
Which law are you referring to?
Served to what end?
Still not making a lot of sense. |
|
LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by DataRiker:Copyright infringement is not a criminal act.
Which law are you referring to?
»www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#506
--
»www.mittromney.com/s/repeal-and-···bamacare
»www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care |
|
| That is criminal infringement. ( to which I've never taken part of )
I was very obviously referring to copyright infringement to which the supreme court does not consider theft.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement
Copyright holders frequently refer to copyright infringement as theft. In copyright law, infringement does not refer to theft of physical objects, but an instance where a person exercises one of the exclusive rights of the copyright holder without authorization.[6] Courts have distinguished between copyright infringement and theft, holding, for instance, in the United States Supreme Court case Dowling v. United States (1985) that bootleg phonorecords did not constitute stolen property and that "interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The Copyright Act even employs a separate term of art to define one who misappropriates a copyright... 'an infringer of the copyright.'" In the case of copyright infringement the province guaranteed to the copyright holder by copyright law is invaded, i.e. exclusive rights, but no control, physical or otherwise, is taken over the copyright, nor is the copyright holder wholly deprived of using the copyrighted work or exercising the exclusive rights held.[1] |
|
LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by DataRiker:That is criminal infringement.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement
Copyright holders frequently refer to copyright infringement as theft. In copyright law, infringement does not refer to theft of physical objects, but an instance where a person exercises one of the exclusive rights of the copyright holder without authorization.[6] Courts have distinguished between copyright infringement and theft, holding, for instance, in the United States Supreme Court case Dowling v. United States (1985) that bootleg phonorecords did not constitute stolen property and that "interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The Copyright Act even employs a separate term of art to define one who misappropriates a copyright... 'an infringer of the copyright.'" In the case of copyright infringement the province guaranteed to the copyright holder by copyright law is invaded, i.e. exclusive rights, but no control, physical or otherwise, is taken over the copyright, nor is the copyright holder wholly deprived of using the copyrighted work or exercising the exclusive rights held.[1]
Wow. wrong again.
The Piracy and Counterfeiting Amendments Act of 1982 amended section 506 by substituting a new subsection(a). Pub. L. No. 97-180, 96 Stat. 91, 93. The Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 amended section 506 by adding subsection (f). Pub. L. No.101-650, 104 Stat. 5089, 5131. In 1997, the No Electronic Theft (NET) Act again amended section 506 by amending subsection (a) in its entirety. Pub. L. No. 105-147, 111 Stat. 2678. That Act also directed the United States Sentencing Commission to “ensure that the applicable guideline range for a defendant convicted of a crime against intellectual property . . . is sufficiently stringent to deter such a crime” and to “ensure that the guidelines provide for consideration of the retail value and quantity of the items with respect to which the crime against intellectual property was committed.” Pub. L. No. 105-147, 111 Stat. 2678, 2680. See also note 2 in Appendix H.
Imagine that. The act was called the "No Electronic Theft Act".
--
»www.mittromney.com/s/repeal-and-···bamacare
»www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care |
|
| Still referring to criminal infringement.
Again, to which I was very obviously not referring to.
( perhaps reading the Wiki on copyright infringement would help )
Criminal liability
Article 61 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) requires that signatory countries establish criminal procedures and penalties in cases of "willful trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale".[5] Copyright holders have demanded that states provide criminal sanctions for all types of copyright infringement.[7] |
|
