the difference between stealing from a shop and stealing online is that youre much more likely to get caught in a shop. Thats part of the reason why people do it, very rarely are there consequences to it.
There are times to stay put, and what you want will come to you.
But there are times to go out into the world and find such a thing for yourself.
I aint no abacus but you can count on me.
the difference between stealing from a shop and stealing online is that youre much more likely to get caught in a shop. Thats part of the reason why people do it, very rarely are there consequences to it.
The same could be applied to rape. Or a number of other crimes. Illegal downloading isn't a 'victimless' crime.
Obviously rape is much worse than illegal downloading, I'm not saying any different. But the arrest and conviction rate for rape is ridiculously low. The chances of being caught are quite slim. Some people are saying that it's fine since the chances of being caught are slim to none. The chances of catching a rapist are slim.
I used to down load my songs. I've stopped now, mainly because I can't be bothered to go through the whole fanarcle of doing it.
I've never downloaded a movie. I have watched them in parts on youtube though.
Just to add, contrary to what most people think and what those irritating anti-piracy ads on dvds may say, illegally downloading something is not stealing. If you steal something from someone, it means they do not have it any more. You cannot steal data. Downloading a copy of some form of data can either be done legally (within the copyright rules for that piece of intellectual property) or you can download it illegally (which breaks copyright rules but is still not stealing). A minor point but one that still annoys me when it's at the end of every film I buy on dvd.
However, whether it's stealing or not, it's still money not being paid in royalties to the people who made it and when it comes down to "I'm broke so I can't afford a whole £5 to spend on X" or someone else's livelihood, I don't think there should be any competition. People will continue to do it and for the most part will continue to get away with it but that doesn't make it right.
On a side issue, I actually think the availability of music for download (whether legally or not) is wrong. It encourages people to download one or two songs off an album, put those on an mp3 layer with lots of other songs on a playlist and just listen to that. Most people reading that will wonder what is so terrible about the above and that's the point. To most people it's the norm and as a result, the music industry is changing to accomodate this mentality.
People don't listen to albums any more. They want instant gratification in the form of a 4 minute song and have no concept of an album as a musical journey to be listened to from beginning to end. It's like taking a book and reading one chapter at random and nothing else. It's empty and meaningless.
I also think it's too easy to get hold of music now. Years ago, you'd save up your pocket money and probably be able to afford one cd a month. You'd walk down to the record store and buy it. And because you've had so much time and money invested in that cd, you listen to it and you try to get as much out of it as possible. Also, if after the first listening, you didn't really get it, you didn't just click delete because you didn't really like it, you listened to it again. Some of the best albums I own took several listens before I really got them.
Another gripe is that by replacing the physical media with a data download, you lose a major part of the experience. You lose the artwork, the sleeve notes and everything else. It varies from cd to cd depending on how much effort the artist has put into the overall package but to only have the music and nothing physical, you lose something.
My final gripe is that mp3s sound crap. A heavily compressed mp3 played through a pair of small tinny headphones sounds so much worse than the original cd played through any decent stereo system. Acoustically, mp3s are a major step backwards compared to cds and compared to 24bit dvd-a or SACDs they are atrocious. I know this is less of an issue for most people as with the best will in the world, regardless of the quality, mp3 players provide an unmatched portability and stereo systems are expensive. However, I also know that sadly the cd is dying a death and eventually there won't be any choice but to play something that frankly sounds terrible.
The same could be applied to rape. Or a number of other crimes. Illegal downloading isn't a 'victimless' crime.
did i say it was victimless?no. I was merely pointing out that a lot of people dont compare the two because of the lack of consequence....
There are times to stay put, and what you want will come to you.
But there are times to go out into the world and find such a thing for yourself.
I aint no abacus but you can count on me.
Just to add, contrary to what most people think and what those irritating anti-piracy ads on dvds may say, illegally downloading something is not stealing. If you steal something from someone, it means they do not have it any more. You cannot steal data. Downloading a copy of some form of data can either be done legally (within the copyright rules for that piece of intellectual property) or you can download it illegally (which breaks copyright rules but is still not stealing). A minor point but one that still annoys me when it's at the end of every film I buy on dvd.
I made this point as well, so I just want to put more emphasis on it. We deviate with the rest of your points, but I too am tired of it being called theft. I personally don't believe in copyrights and the such though, so while it may be illegal, I don't view it as immoral.
Also, I download full albums, always have, always will. Even if it's only for 1-3 songs on the album I really like. I guess we're just weird :P
As to other people's points, I would easily consider it a victimless crime. Not all downloads are potential record sales, I don't buy the record companies as victims. No actual theft of property has occured, no one is deprived of their property.
I download every once in awhile, but mostly just to 'test' an album before wasting $15 on something that only has one good song on it.
I still buy all the CDs and DVD's I've downloaded though, just because I like getting the little CD booklets and stuff that comes with them. Also, if you buy them secondhand, it's not that expensive.
Back to downloading though, I don't find it 'wrong', really. And I think it's ridiculous that people are comparing it to rape and murder. Really guys?
but the effects on its 'victims' are in no way at all comparable.
That still doesn't make it any more right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratatouille strychnine
Just to add, contrary to what most people think and what those irritating anti-piracy ads on dvds may say, illegally downloading something is not stealing. If you steal something from someone, it means they do not have it any more. You cannot steal data. Downloading a copy of some form of data can either be done legally (within the copyright rules for that piece of intellectual property) or you can download it illegally (which breaks copyright rules but is still not stealing). A minor point but one that still annoys me when it's at the end of every film I buy on dvd.
However, whether it's stealing or not, it's still money not being paid in royalties to the people who made it and when it comes down to "I'm broke so I can't afford a whole £5 to spend on X" or someone else's livelihood, I don't think there should be any competition. People will continue to do it and for the most part will continue to get away with it but that doesn't make it right.
I know it's technically piracy, but I see it as stealing from the money which should be going to all the people involved in the production of the product.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamofunity
I personally don't believe in copyrights and the such though, so while it may be illegal, I don't view it as immoral.
As to other people's points, I would easily consider it a victimless crime. Not all downloads are potential record sales, I don't buy the record companies as victims. No actual theft of property has occured, no one is deprived of their property.
Just because you don't believe in a certain thing, it doesn't really mean you can go do it regardless.
The victims are the people involved in making the songs/films who are losing out on money and their livelihoods because of people not wanting to pay for their work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daemon.
I have been following a leading torrent tracker sites legal battle as they recently got taken to court, However they are winning the court case as they still manage to keep inside the law and do not host any of the material themselves.
Is that not because the site itself is legal, but what people do with it isn't? Sites like Limewire are perfectly legal, it's the people uploading copyrighted material who are in the wrong.
People aren't really going to be arrested for this because the police quite frankly have better things to do with their time. I don't believe that it means you can just download anyway.
Back to downloading though, I don't find it 'wrong', really. And I think it's ridiculous that people are comparing it to rape and murder. Really guys?
I wasn't comparing illegal downloading per-ce with rape and murder, but more the logic that you should do what you want to do, regardless of consequences. And I think that Claire was comparing the fact that you shouldn't just do something illegal because the chances of you getting caught are slim.
They are comparable in that situation, because we're discussing the logic behind it, not necessarily the actual act.
At the end of the day, regardless of what you believe of intellectual property, there are hundreds of people involved in the making of an album, that's hundreds of people who are not getting the money that they have worked for, because of illegal downloading. The idea that 'well, I can't afford it, so therefore I should download it without paying for it' sickens me, quite frankly. I think it's awful, that people can be so self-absorbed.
But anyway, I have to go have a shower & get ready for work.
Also, not having to do with that, I believe it's only illegal to host or upload, not to download.
The trial ended yesterday and the verdict is due April 17. I have seen articles say that PB handles 60% of torrents and if PB's servers go down it will take a lot of network down with it.
I have tried getting clear and what is/isn't illegal and it's remarkably sketchy. In Canada uploading is illegal abut not downloading (or so I read). In the US both are supposed to be illegal since Millennium Act but I have read they bust uploaders more because its an easier case and some people/places (colleges) were hubs.
I know the suits go to civil court which is different from criminal court. In criminal court a person has to be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In civil court a person only has be be shown as "probably" guilty. That's why OJ Simpson won in criminal court but convicted in civil court.
I was already grown up when iTunes came out. Prior to that it was never a big deal recording music on the radio on tapes/CD's and then passing them around (indeed so many cents on each CD-R went to music industry because they anticipated copying). There were no suits.
A funny thing was that in late 90's the labels were found guilty of collusion. They were agreeing among themselves to keep prices higher by about 20%. They were made to donate items to schools and libraries. They dumped mostly junk.
I download music as i do not agree with the music industry. The artist gets paid regardless if you buy the CD or not, it's the record company that lose out and they infringe creative rights. So many artists these days in the mainstream and otherwise are not allowed full creative control which defeats the purpose of music. Some people say that underground bands sell out when they get a major record deal, it's more that they aren't allowed to make the music they love anymore legally. Thats why i download as i don't want to fund that. The only CD's i will buy now are those bound by the Creative Commons licence and are not bound by record label control.
PS. To the thread creator, in your opening post you brought up the credit crunch as an argument. That is politically and morally skewed as the credit crunch has been around for less than a year and downloading has been going on since the turn of the 90's. It's a very shallow argument, while money may be an issue the credit crunch has nothing to do with it. If anything the credit crunch has made CD's and DVD's cheaper making downloading a worse offense as most people should now be able to afford chart CD's and DVD's at their new £8.99 or lower price.
How would you feel if somebody came up to you, stole your purse, and punched you?
Rape benefits the rapers - does that make it right?
Murder benefits the murderers - does that make it right?
And this has anything to do with the topic of conversation because.... ? There is a world of difference between murder and downloading music. Stick to the point.
Never watched a video on Youtube then? Since the majority of stuff on there is put up "without permission" and all that cobblers?
Just because you don't believe in a certain thing, it doesn't really mean you can go do it regardless.
Yes it does, and I do.
I don't blindly follow laws I disagree with, and if it were something I thought was morally wrong I wouldn't do it even if it weren't the law. I disagree with the law, I don't find it immoral to break it, so I do it without remorse and get away with it.
^^ that's a bit harsh. The victims are the people losing out on money and losing out on jobs because the record companies are not making as much money.
