that extreme torrent...extremebits.org is causing quite a stir!

[Hanael]

Originally Posted by chrismcb

And yes this topic has been debated many many times on the tubes, and yet everyone thinks it is still OK to steal someone elses work, and that there won't be any consequences.

wat?



Probably we're living in a different world.
Because of torrent, i bought this album.

How many people out there knows her, outside jp?
o_0a

[SteveC]

hmm, not really.

most of the time you're not actually paying for a product, like say buying an apple to eat.
you're paying for the right to use it, usually with limitations such as not broadcasting it.

In effect what you do when you copy music/video is you steal a license.



That said, I do think that fighting it is a relatively futile endeavor.
Not that I think they should have to "adapt of die" —
just that I think it's inevitable that those that don't adapt, will die...


some money can be made from say the share/crippleware model, we did.
but the people who use these are usually new/small. you're never going to see a large game made this way.

[Bugs]

Originally Posted by SteveC

...most of the time you're not actually paying for a product, like say buying an apple to eat.
you're paying for the right to use it, usually with limitations such as not broadcasting it.

In effect what you do when you copy music/video is you steal a license

There is no license when you buy a CD/DVD. You own it and can do what you want with it (except distribute it, as per copyright). No analogy with a physical item like an apple makes sense.

Can I try and summarise both sides of the argument?

Side A: What about the producers of content? They gotta make a buck, and if they can't make a buck they won't produce any content and none of us will have new movies to watch or new music to listen to.

Side B: Why should an industry group be legislatively protected from technological advances that render their product essentially free? We don't have to worry about people having no incentive to produce content - the success of every free-content web site shows that financial incentive is unnecessary (see Youtube and Silverfish and a million more examples). In fact, the end of copyright is likely to lead to MORE cultural production as potential producers will have greater access to other people's work (one of the main raw materials of cultural production). And furthermore, the side-effects of the police state that would be required to enforce copyright law in the digital age are worse than any possible negative effects stemming from the end of copyright protection.

If you couldn't tell, I'm with Side B, although I recognise that the changes implied by these arguments are going to mean a wrenching shift for a lot of people.

Michael Brooke is swimming against the tide. The net is a vast reservoir of skate photos and writing about skating, and yet he's still making a magazine consisting of these two things and selling it. I'm pleased that he's able to do this, but if magazines became instantly "copyable" the way that movies and music are then he'd probably be out of a job. Actually he probably wouldn't - the magazine would still have the advertising revenue to fall back on.

[SteveC]

You're right it is different to a EULA, but it's similar.

As for the analogy, think of it this way, you could legally eat the CD - it's yours.

[BetterSense]

post-scarcity economics

The thing that interests me, is an entire generation of kids are growing up, breaking the law, and not caring. They know it is illegal. They do it anyway. When some random person gets busted for piracy, they get angry. This dissolves their respect for the legal system, which makes me happy.

[SpeedFiend]

the film industry on mondays says, pick a movie title, it made a hundred million last weekend. thats why people steal their product and dont care. its the obscene money numbers they throw around.

[Buddywolfe]

you also have to remember who the money is really going to for these projects its not the snowboarders or the musicians it is going to the producers. It is wrong but you can't stop it and preserve civil liberties.

The way I see it: I will not download a song from a new band still trying to make it, or if I have respect for them, but if the band is older and rich (or dead) I feel no problem downloading their music.
i.e.
Coldplays new album- bought it
Bob dylan albums- Download them

[SpeedFiend]

downloading music has made me buy more music.

the music industry had a huge price fixing scandal. the price of a cd used to be way more than it is now. not many products drop in price like that.

i have fourty thousand songs it says on my hd, there is no way i could afford that.

theres no money in music these days.

the movies are worried all of the above will happen to them. soon as i can download a movie in the same time as it takes now to get a song.
i cant wait for the net to get that fast. cause i know for sure the producers will keep making movies, they are just too greedy not to. two years ago they cut down on the amount of screeners released for the oscars. so i guess they are doing something. but they dont have a viable business model to convince me i should pay for a movie.

i hate paying for stuff i get can for free.

[chrismcb]

Originally Posted by SpeedFiend

downloading music has made me buy more music.

the music industry had a huge price fixing scandal. the price of a cd used to be way more than it is now. not many products drop in price like that.

i have fourty thousand songs it says on my hd, there is no way i could afford that.

theres no money in music these days.
i hate paying for stuff i get can for free.

Just because you've stolen a ton of music doesn't mean it is OK to steal. Look, you've already pointed out the probelm "theres no money in music these days." That is because everyone steals the music. You've also said as soon as it is easy for you to steal movies, you'll also do that.

Since you hate paying for stuff you can get for free... What else do you steal?

The price of a cd used to be way more than it is now, because people paid for it. Then people started to steal it, and fewer people purchase CD's. "demand' dropped, so price dropped.

You know I get music for free too. I listen to the radio, I listen to music channels on my tv. I go to the band's website/myspace and listen to their samples. Sometimes I buy their cd, sometimes I just continue to listen to the radio.

No matter whether you consider it stealing or not, the point is you are taken something that wasn't given to you, without paying for it.

As far as the artists getting paid/not getting paid. That is an issue between the producer and the artist. I'll tell you this, if you don't pay for the movie/music, the producer isn't going to make any money, and the end result is neither will the artist. The fact the producers is making more money, doesn't give you any more of a right to steal the product either.