geekhack
geekhack Community => Off Topic => Topic started by: berserkfan on Tue, 04 November 2014, 07:24:18
-
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-29895123
Recently I heard about Gottfried Warg, one of Piratebay's founders, being sentenced to jail. Now I'm reading about another Piratebay founder being arrested.
Do you guys think these people have been unfairly treated? Do you think they are scumbags who deserve no mercy? Do you think the law cracks down on them because they infringed on the property rights of the rich and powerful, whereas child rapists, pedophiles and sex traffickers in the UK (see various distressing BBC articles) get away scot free because of their race and religion?
I don't think it is good to steal other people's intellectual property right, but I think there are far worse crimes in the world that the police don't crack down on.
-
Do you guys think these people have been unfairly treated?
Yes.
Do you think they are scumbags who deserve no mercy?
No.
Do you think the law cracks down on them because they infringed on the property rights of the rich and powerful, whereas child rapists, pedophiles and sex traffickers in the UK (see various distressing BBC articles) get away scot free because of their race and religion?
Yes and yes.
-
Laws are fine, it's the sentences that need to change.
-
Do you guys think these people have been unfairly treated?
Yes.
Do you think they are scumbags who deserve no mercy?
No.
Do you think the law cracks down on them because they infringed on the property rights of the rich and powerful, whereas child rapists, pedophiles and sex traffickers in the UK (see various distressing BBC articles) get away scot free because of their race and religion?
Yes and yes.
Lulz
The Pirate Bay guys where fools who built a company (essentially) that was illegal and then ran away. From what I've read isn't the guy who got a prison sentence, only in for 4 years? I have known people who have been convicted of meanial sex charges to be sentenced to longer.
Also the crackdown on illegal file sharing has been something that's been going on for what, 10years now? Longer probably.. And this is the first time they have been able to go after the sause... They have to make an example of them, something which is done all the time, and seems to work. I would much rather they go after these morons than continue to take innosent parents to court because there idiot teenage child downloaded some pop song off a torrent site...
-
Information wants to be free.
White collar crime is the behavior most destructive to human society.
-
To many people these guys have become larger than life, to say I have little support for their cause is like sacrilege. I think their cases should be handled fairly however, just like all cases ideally should be. Any discussion centered around piracy-related issues though becomes difficult when so many people do it.
On the one hand it's idiotic to sue the moms who 'get caught' with a handful of pirated music for exorbitant amounts as 'examples to others', but these guys were running a site called the Pirate Bay for goodness sake, they've always maintained a pro-piracy agenda and focus.
-
To many people these guys have become larger than life, to say I have little support for their cause is like sacrilege. I think their cases should be handled fairly however, just like all cases ideally should be. Any discussion centered around piracy-related issues though becomes difficult when so many people do it.
On the one hand it's idiotic to sue the moms who 'get caught' with a handful of pirated music for exorbitant amounts as 'examples to others', but these guys were running a site called the Pirate Bay for goodness sake, they've always maintained a pro-piracy agenda and focus.
They also ran Ad's on the site which no matter how little, made them money.
-
Information wants to be free.
White collar crime is the behavior most destructive to human society.
The piratebay guys have probably inflicted at least a billion dollars' of losses on copyright holders.
Goldman Sachs has inflicted at least $10 Trillion of losses on Americans for the next 3 generations. And at least a similar amount on the rest of the world especially on poor people who can least afford all their financial shennigans and manipulations.
Lets see some punishment where it is due, and I'll be more sympathetic to copyright holders. But let me guess, Goldman Sachs is 'systemically important' and the US economy will collapse if you piss them off, whereas the Piratebay is just a website.
-
To many people these guys have become larger than life, to say I have little support for their cause is like sacrilege. I think their cases should be handled fairly however, just like all cases ideally should be. Any discussion centered around piracy-related issues though becomes difficult when so many people do it.
On the one hand it's idiotic to sue the moms who 'get caught' with a handful of pirated music for exorbitant amounts as 'examples to others', but these guys were running a site called the Pirate Bay for goodness sake, they've always maintained a pro-piracy agenda and focus.
They also ran Ad's on the site which no matter how little, made them money.
It also costs a good bit of money to run such an operation, so ads were kinda necessary
-
To many people these guys have become larger than life, to say I have little support for their cause is like sacrilege. I think their cases should be handled fairly however, just like all cases ideally should be. Any discussion centered around piracy-related issues though becomes difficult when so many people do it.
On the one hand it's idiotic to sue the moms who 'get caught' with a handful of pirated music for exorbitant amounts as 'examples to others', but these guys were running a site called the Pirate Bay for goodness sake, they've always maintained a pro-piracy agenda and focus.
They also ran Ad's on the site which no matter how little, made them money.
It also costs a good bit of money to run such an operation, so ads were kinda necessary
If they where doing it (something ilegal) to make a political statement or something along those lines they shouldn't have even thought about making any money from it 'to cover costs'.
-
i mean like im not going to read all the **** going on in this thread but like
they made something called "the pirate bay", that's already pretty shabby sounding and obviously implies spreading illegal content, and i'm pretty sure that's the idea, illegal stuff
and as much as i think pirating is really convenient, (i stopped pirating a while ago) i think they should still go to jail
i read their info page or whatever which states why they shouldnt go to jail, and it is entertaining, but all it says is "oh we didnt directly steal the declaration of independence leave us alone" and "we're outside your country leave us alone even more"
in this case imo its like giving a bunch of locked up looneys knives and tied up women in a basement they call the "blatant sexkill and killrape dungeon" and say "well we, the founders, didnt stab any women, and it's not your basement so why should we get punished"
-
To many people these guys have become larger than life, to say I have little support for their cause is like sacrilege. I think their cases should be handled fairly however, just like all cases ideally should be. Any discussion centered around piracy-related issues though becomes difficult when so many people do it.
On the one hand it's idiotic to sue the moms who 'get caught' with a handful of pirated music for exorbitant amounts as 'examples to others', but these guys were running a site called the Pirate Bay for goodness sake, they've always maintained a pro-piracy agenda and focus.
They also ran Ad's on the site which no matter how little, made them money.
It also costs a good bit of money to run such an operation, so ads were kinda necessary
If they were doing it (something illegal) to make a political statement or something along those lines they shouldn't have even thought about making any money from it 'to cover costs'.
"to cover costs" as in not lose incredible amounts of money running the site ad free, an amount that few people could take on
-
Do you think the law cracks down on them because they infringed on the property rights of the rich and powerful, whereas child rapists, pedophiles and sex traffickers in the UK (see various distressing BBC articles) get away scot free because of their race and religion?
Yes and yes.
And as for this topic, I find politically correct people quite scary. Their closest analogues seem to be the diehard ultra left radicals of Mao's era/Red Guards. Just mention the race/ nationality/ religion/ some clearly identifying descriptor of a criminal, if the criminal is of a darker skin color, and wow, the saliva will fly.
In Singapore the custom is to mention the race or name of a criminal only if he is of Singaporean nationality. Otherwise the politically correct people get really mad. It is widely expected that foreigners will get much better treatment in the courts, especially if their victim is local. I can't even begin to start ranting about these mindless politically correct scum. Their hatred for law and order, for some basic enforcement of social norms and protection of the vulnerable, knows no bounds. There was this movement that was trying to distribute free ice cream and screen free movies to foreign workers after they started a major riot last year. I would have distributed free guns and ammo to the affected business owners.
-
To many people these guys have become larger than life, to say I have little support for their cause is like sacrilege. I think their cases should be handled fairly however, just like all cases ideally should be. Any discussion centered around piracy-related issues though becomes difficult when so many people do it.
On the one hand it's idiotic to sue the moms who 'get caught' with a handful of pirated music for exorbitant amounts as 'examples to others', but these guys were running a site called the Pirate Bay for goodness sake, they've always maintained a pro-piracy agenda and focus.
They also ran Ad's on the site which no matter how little, made them money.
It also costs a good bit of money to run such an operation, so ads were kinda necessary
If they were doing it (something illegal) to make a political statement or something along those lines they shouldn't have even thought about making any money from it 'to cover costs'.
"to cover costs" as in not lose incredible amounts of money running the site ad free, an amount that few people could take on
It's a ridiculous notion/argument.
It's like the Monk who protested about the persecution of Buddhists in South Vietnam getting a VAT receipt for the paraffin he used to set himself on fire...
There are plenty of intelligent, legal, moral and ethical ways in which to protest about what ever the **** they claimed to be 'protesting'.
Instead they created the largest, most aptly named website and then helped create a persona for it and them as some sort of rallying point against big American Corporations, while making money. Which made them a huge illegal target, they then tried to fight this, failed and aptly ran away... only to be caught again. I don't know if you can even measure that level of autism....
-
To many people these guys have become larger than life, to say I have little support for their cause is like sacrilege. I think their cases should be handled fairly however, just like all cases ideally should be. Any discussion centered around piracy-related issues though becomes difficult when so many people do it.
On the one hand it's idiotic to sue the moms who 'get caught' with a handful of pirated music for exorbitant amounts as 'examples to others', but these guys were running a site called the Pirate Bay for goodness sake, they've always maintained a pro-piracy agenda and focus.
They also ran Ad's on the site which no matter how little, made them money.
It also costs a good bit of money to run such an operation, so ads were kinda necessary
If they were doing it (something illegal) to make a political statement or something along those lines they shouldn't have even thought about making any money from it 'to cover costs'.
"to cover costs" as in not lose incredible amounts of money running the site ad free, an amount that few people could take on
It's a ridiculous notion/argument.
It's like the Monk who protested about the persecution of Buddhists in South Vietnam getting a VAT receipt for the paraffin he used to set himself on fire...
There are plenty of intelligent, legal, moral and ethical ways in which to protest about what ever the **** they claimed to be 'protesting'.
Instead they created the largest, most aptly named website and then helped create a persona for it and them as some sort of rallying point against big American Corporations, while making money. Which made them a huge illegal target, they then tried to fight this, failed and aptly ran away... only to be caught again. I don't know if you can even measure that level of autism....
The protest may have been part of it, but one of their primary goals was just to make a helpful website for people. It would have been more like if the monk had a job to pay for it, just like ads were the primary sources of income used by the site to pay for their expenses
-
To many people these guys have become larger than life, to say I have little support for their cause is like sacrilege. I think their cases should be handled fairly however, just like all cases ideally should be. Any discussion centered around piracy-related issues though becomes difficult when so many people do it.
On the one hand it's idiotic to sue the moms who 'get caught' with a handful of pirated music for exorbitant amounts as 'examples to others', but these guys were running a site called the Pirate Bay for goodness sake, they've always maintained a pro-piracy agenda and focus.
They also ran Ad's on the site which no matter how little, made them money.
It also costs a good bit of money to run such an operation, so ads were kinda necessary
If they were doing it (something illegal) to make a political statement or something along those lines they shouldn't have even thought about making any money from it 'to cover costs'.
"to cover costs" as in not lose incredible amounts of money running the site ad free, an amount that few people could take on
It's a ridiculous notion/argument.
It's like the Monk who protested about the persecution of Buddhists in South Vietnam getting a VAT receipt for the paraffin he used to set himself on fire...
There are plenty of intelligent, legal, moral and ethical ways in which to protest about what ever the **** they claimed to be 'protesting'.
Instead they created the largest, most aptly named website and then helped create a persona for it and them as some sort of rallying point against big American Corporations, while making money. Which made them a huge illegal target, they then tried to fight this, failed and aptly ran away... only to be caught again. I don't know if you can even measure that level of autism....
The protest may have been part of it, but one of their primary goals was just to make a helpful website for people. It would have been more like if the monk had a job to pay for it, just like ads were the primary sources of income used by the site to pay for their expenses
...Paying for an illegal site... they made money from the process of stealing others peoples work... If they wanted to make a helpful website they should have done that, instead they made the biggest torrent'ing site on the planet and positioned it, and themselves as invincible and the only place to pirate other peoples ****...
-
To many people these guys have become larger than life, to say I have little support for their cause is like sacrilege. I think their cases should be handled fairly however, just like all cases ideally should be. Any discussion centered around piracy-related issues though becomes difficult when so many people do it.
On the one hand it's idiotic to sue the moms who 'get caught' with a handful of pirated music for exorbitant amounts as 'examples to others', but these guys were running a site called the Pirate Bay for goodness sake, they've always maintained a pro-piracy agenda and focus.
They also ran Ad's on the site which no matter how little, made them money.
It also costs a good bit of money to run such an operation, so ads were kinda necessary
If they were doing it (something illegal) to make a political statement or something along those lines they shouldn't have even thought about making any money from it 'to cover costs'.
"to cover costs" as in not lose incredible amounts of money running the site ad free, an amount that few people could take on
It's a ridiculous notion/argument.
It's like the Monk who protested about the persecution of Buddhists in South Vietnam getting a VAT receipt for the paraffin he used to set himself on fire...
There are plenty of intelligent, legal, moral and ethical ways in which to protest about what ever the **** they claimed to be 'protesting'.
Instead they created the largest, most aptly named website and then helped create a persona for it and them as some sort of rallying point against big American Corporations, while making money. Which made them a huge illegal target, they then tried to fight this, failed and aptly ran away... only to be caught again. I don't know if you can even measure that level of autism....
The protest may have been part of it, but one of their primary goals was just to make a helpful website for people. It would have been more like if the monk had a job to pay for it, just like ads were the primary sources of income used by the site to pay for their expenses
...Paying for an illegal site... they made money from the process of stealing others peoples work... If they wanted to make a helpful website they should have done that, instead they made the biggest torrent'ing site on the planet and positioned it, and themselves as invincible and the only place to pirate other peoples ****...
Money was made through the hosting of a site which let people make things available for easy download, legal or otherwise. And they are far from the only place to torrent, places like nyaa or kick ass torrents, which was quickly becoming more popular anyway
-
To many people these guys have become larger than life, to say I have little support for their cause is like sacrilege. I think their cases should be handled fairly however, just like all cases ideally should be. Any discussion centered around piracy-related issues though becomes difficult when so many people do it.
On the one hand it's idiotic to sue the moms who 'get caught' with a handful of pirated music for exorbitant amounts as 'examples to others', but these guys were running a site called the Pirate Bay for goodness sake, they've always maintained a pro-piracy agenda and focus.
They also ran Ad's on the site which no matter how little, made them money.
It also costs a good bit of money to run such an operation, so ads were kinda necessary
If they were doing it (something illegal) to make a political statement or something along those lines they shouldn't have even thought about making any money from it 'to cover costs'.
"to cover costs" as in not lose incredible amounts of money running the site ad free, an amount that few people could take on
It's a ridiculous notion/argument.
It's like the Monk who protested about the persecution of Buddhists in South Vietnam getting a VAT receipt for the paraffin he used to set himself on fire...
There are plenty of intelligent, legal, moral and ethical ways in which to protest about what ever the **** they claimed to be 'protesting'.
Instead they created the largest, most aptly named website and then helped create a persona for it and them as some sort of rallying point against big American Corporations, while making money. Which made them a huge illegal target, they then tried to fight this, failed and aptly ran away... only to be caught again. I don't know if you can even measure that level of autism....
The protest may have been part of it, but one of their primary goals was just to make a helpful website for people. It would have been more like if the monk had a job to pay for it, just like ads were the primary sources of income used by the site to pay for their expenses
...Paying for an illegal site... they made money from the process of stealing others peoples work... If they wanted to make a helpful website they should have done that, instead they made the biggest torrent'ing site on the planet and positioned it, and themselves as invincible and the only place to pirate other peoples ****...
Money was made through the hosting of a site which let people make things available for easy download, legal or otherwise. And they are far from the only place to torrent, places like nyaa or kick ass torrents, which was quickly becoming more popular anyway
I don't get your argument, or the point of what your saying... the fact that there are other sites doing illegal ****, makes the fact that these guys where doing it publicly... ok?
-
Information wants to be free.
White collar crime is the behavior most destructive to human society.
The piratebay guys have probably inflicted at least a billion dollars' of losses on copyright holders.
Goldman Sachs has inflicted at least $10 Trillion of losses on Americans for the next 3 generations. And at least a similar amount on the rest of the world especially on poor people who can least afford all their financial shennigans and manipulations.
Lets see some punishment where it is due, and I'll be more sympathetic to copyright holders. But let me guess, Goldman Sachs is 'systemically important' and the US economy will collapse if you piss them off, whereas the Piratebay is just a website.
^ this.
-
Information wants to be free.
White collar crime is the behavior most destructive to human society.
The piratebay guys have probably inflicted at least a billion dollars' of losses on copyright holders.
Goldman Sachs has inflicted at least $10 Trillion of losses on Americans for the next 3 generations. And at least a similar amount on the rest of the world especially on poor people who can least afford all their financial shennigans and manipulations.
Lets see some punishment where it is due, and I'll be more sympathetic to copyright holders. But let me guess, Goldman Sachs is 'systemically important' and the US economy will collapse if you piss them off, whereas the Piratebay is just a website.
^ this.
Also a lot of the people responsible for the Financial crisis of 2008(?) are now apart of the Obama administration :D
Money is power, so it makes sense that the people with the most money, have the most power. This is even more apparent in America becasue the only way you can win an election, is with money (to spend on advertising etc). It's one of the many great failings of the American political system.
-
To many people these guys have become larger than life, to say I have little support for their cause is like sacrilege. I think their cases should be handled fairly however, just like all cases ideally should be. Any discussion centered around piracy-related issues though becomes difficult when so many people do it.
On the one hand it's idiotic to sue the moms who 'get caught' with a handful of pirated music for exorbitant amounts as 'examples to others', but these guys were running a site called the Pirate Bay for goodness sake, they've always maintained a pro-piracy agenda and focus.
They also ran Ad's on the site which no matter how little, made them money.
It also costs a good bit of money to run such an operation, so ads were kinda necessary
If they were doing it (something illegal) to make a political statement or something along those lines they shouldn't have even thought about making any money from it 'to cover costs'.
"to cover costs" as in not lose incredible amounts of money running the site ad free, an amount that few people could take on
It's a ridiculous notion/argument.
It's like the Monk who protested about the persecution of Buddhists in South Vietnam getting a VAT receipt for the paraffin he used to set himself on fire...
There are plenty of intelligent, legal, moral and ethical ways in which to protest about what ever the **** they claimed to be 'protesting'.
Instead they created the largest, most aptly named website and then helped create a persona for it and them as some sort of rallying point against big American Corporations, while making money. Which made them a huge illegal target, they then tried to fight this, failed and aptly ran away... only to be caught again. I don't know if you can even measure that level of autism....
The protest may have been part of it, but one of their primary goals was just to make a helpful website for people. It would have been more like if the monk had a job to pay for it, just like ads were the primary sources of income used by the site to pay for their expenses
...Paying for an illegal site... they made money from the process of stealing others peoples work... If they wanted to make a helpful website they should have done that, instead they made the biggest torrent'ing site on the planet and positioned it, and themselves as invincible and the only place to pirate other peoples ****...
Money was made through the hosting of a site which let people make things available for easy download, legal or otherwise. And they are far from the only place to torrent, places like nyaa or kick ass torrents, which was quickly becoming more popular anyway
I don't get your argument, or the point of what your saying... the fact that there are other sites doing illegal ****, makes the fact that these guys where doing it publicly... ok?
Well if you had actually read what I had said, you would have seen that I addressed the legality in the first sentence, and then your statement about them being the only torrenting website
-
Information wants to be free.
White collar crime is the behavior most destructive to human society.
The piratebay guys have probably inflicted at least a billion dollars' of losses on copyright holders.
Goldman Sachs has inflicted at least $10 Trillion of losses on Americans for the next 3 generations. And at least a similar amount on the rest of the world especially on poor people who can least afford all their financial shennigans and manipulations.
Lets see some punishment where it is due, and I'll be more sympathetic to copyright holders. But let me guess, Goldman Sachs is 'systemically important' and the US economy will collapse if you piss them off, whereas the Piratebay is just a website.
^ this.
Also a lot of the people responsible for the Financial crisis of 2008(?) are now apart of the Obama administration :D
Money is power, so it makes sense that the people with the most money, have the most power. This is even more apparent in America becasue the only way you can win an election, is with money (to spend on advertising etc). It's one of the many great failings of the American political system.
Well Romney had tons of money and he still couldn't win :p
-
Well if you had actually read what I had said, you would have seen that I addressed the legality in the first sentence, and then your statement about them being the only torrenting website
Ok buddie, so The Pirate Bay was simply a helpful website that helped people download things they where looking for?
But it got pretty expensive to run becasue of the number of hits they would get, and so had to make money from it to cover the costs?
-
your intellectual property rights stop as soon post it online its as simple as that... Google prove me wrong???? they are being treated wrong, but they new the risks and now there paying. its the way the world works no reason to feeling bad for them.
-
Copyright law is a travesty first off. In 90% of cases it doesn't protect the creators of the work since they don't even own their own material. Their label/studio/publisher own it. Frankly I couldn't give a **** if MediaMegaCorp is out another $20 for a copy of X. The biggest part of why the law is broken is they keep letting these jokers extend on it. Things were supposed to go public domain, but go look how much of it really has in the last 15 years. Not hardly what should have been. Loads of older stuff should be free now if the terms hadn't been allowed to be changed from the original periods. Furthermore art and culture shouldn't be allowed to be controlled by the largest corporations strictly. It belongs to everyone.
As far as the guys go, I think it sucks but they had to know the risks of doing what they did in the current climate and who they are up against. Though in most places infringement is still not illegal, and I wish people would stop using the terms illegal and stealing since those are incorrect terms.
In short time it will be possible to 3D scan items and print them with great precision cost effectively. If people 3D scan various objects and post those files to allow people to print, is that going to be stealing? **** NO. Taking a COPY of something is not stealing damn it!
This is the future, companies need to just accept it and move the **** on.
-
Also the crackdown on illegal file sharing has been something that's been going on for what, 10years now? Longer probably..
"home taping is killing music" - ca. 1980
This is why most music today is so bad: we killed it by taping records.
edit: according to this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old-time_radio#Home_radio_recordings_in_the_United_States) radio taping has been a thing since at least 1930. It was pretty rare until magnetic wire and magnetic tape recorders entered the consumer market in the late '40s and '50s though.
-
Copyright law is a travesty first off. In 90% of cases it doesn't protect the creators of the work since they don't even own their own material. Their label/studio/publisher own it. Frankly I couldn't give a **** if MediaMegaCorp is out another $20 for a copy of X. The biggest part of why the law is broken is they keep letting these jokers extend on it. Things were supposed to go public domain, but go look how much of it really has in the last 15 years. Not hardly what should have been. Loads of older stuff should be free now if the terms hadn't been allowed to be changed from the original periods. Furthermore art and culture shouldn't be allowed to be controlled by the largest corporations strictly. It belongs to everyone.
As far as the guys go, I think it sucks but they had to know the risks of doing what they did in the current climate and who they are up against. Though in most places infringement is still not illegal, and I wish people would stop using the terms illegal and stealing since those are incorrect terms.
In short time it will be possible to 3D scan items and print them with great precision cost effectively. If people 3D scan various objects and post those files to allow people to print, is that going to be stealing? **** NO. Taking a COPY of something is not stealing damn it!
This is the future, companies need to just accept it and move the **** on.
when you're talking about companies like that.. it's disconnecting.. Companies ARE people..
It's a battlefield of people, that's all that is..
Communism is more possible today than ever... and the RICH are becoming ever more afraid of the fact that they might have to work for a living.. that's the scariest thing to most americans..
Here's how Americans work.. all day, go home, get fat..
Here's how Afghani farmers work.. all day, go home, have enough left over each day to buy their kid exactly 1 cookie... 1 cookie.. just 1... not a pack, not a whole box, just 1.
-
Also the crackdown on illegal file sharing has been something that's been going on for what, 10years now? Longer probably..
"home taping is killing music" - ca. 1980
This is why most music today is so bad: we killed it by taping records.
I mean in regards to file sharing.
I don't share the opinion that millionare record label managers are out of pocket because of sharing, I think the opposite. But as Napster came and went the RIAA made it's mission statement to essentially go after anyone filesharing or downloading something illegally, regardless. That was my point.
-
The piratebay guys have probably inflicted at least a billion dollars' of losses on copyright holders.
And that's even a quite high estimate. It's hard to say what amount of damage torrenting has inflicted. In many cases people will download something because it's free and easy, and not even consume it. has damage occurred in this case? What about the people who download stuff (again: free and easy) that wouldn't have bought it at any price in the first place, not necessarily because it costs money, but because it takes more time? One can argue that this second class of people has helped the industry by spreading media to people who otherwise wouldn't hear it instead of being passive (taking no part).
I mean, had I pirated albums in the past, and really enjoyed them. I would absolutely ensure that I buy them legitimately, and delete / remove any ones I don't listen to. If I did such a thing, that is.
Also the crackdown on illegal file sharing has been something that's been going on for what, 10years now? Longer probably..
"home taping is killing music" - ca. 1980
This is why most music today is so bad: we killed it by taping records.
I mean in regards to file sharing.
I don't share the opinion that millionare record label managers are out of pocket because of sharing, I think the opposite. But as Napster came and went the RIAA made it's mission statement to essentially go after anyone filesharing or downloading something illegally, regardless. That was my point.
I meant that too. This is just file sharing before the age of computers. It's almost exactly the same as what is happening now, but with more effort involved.
The record player is like a CD player. The tape drive is like the computer. The tape itself is a hard drive. They just have to share it physically by handing off a tape to a friend rather than digitally by sending them a piece of a file. In the '30s it was a lot harder than before there were tapes and the quality was lower, but the analog hole will always be there waiting. File sharing will always be a thing.
And even in the computer age. "don't copy that floppy" came out in 1992. Such things were for sure happening in the 1980s and probably in the '70s.
-
Ok? I mean you took a random sentence out of context and then made a point most logical people would agree on, but a point that didn't really relate to the rest of my post lol:S colour me confused
-
If the guys behind TPB are rightfully in jail for making a website with *links* to content, because it causes financial loses to the entertainment industry…
…then the RedTube/XVideos/… stuff ought to be shot straight away, because masturbation lowers birth rates.
-
If the guys behind TPB are rightfully in jail for making a website with *links* to content, because it causes financial loses for the entertainment industry…
…then the RedTube/XVideos/… stuff ought to be shot right away, because masturbation lowers birth rates.
Given the level of population, wouldn't the lowering of birth rate be a good thing?
-
If the guys behind TPB are rightfully in jail for making a website with *links* to content, because it causes financial loses for the entertainment industry…
…then the RedTube/XVideos/… stuff ought to be shot right away, because masturbation lowers birth rates.
Given the level of population, wouldn't the lowering of birth rate be a good thing?
Depends which population.
Given the current state of entertainment industry, wouldn't be lowering the money flow a good thing?
-
If the guys behind TPB are rightfully in jail for making a website with *links* to content, because it causes financial loses for the entertainment industry…
…then the RedTube/XVideos/… stuff ought to be shot right away, because masturbation lowers birth rates.
Given the level of population, wouldn't the lowering of birth rate be a good thing?
Depends which population.
Given the current state of entertainment industry, wouldn't be lowering the money flow a good thing?
True, which is why I'm pro murder
-
well we had fun **** this thread plz lock
-
This is the future, companies need to just accept it and move the **** on.
Ivan, I normally have the highest respect for you, but here you are sounding like an idealistic kid.
Accept and move on?
Do you know that companies (Disney being the main culprit) got the Hustlers and the Scalawags (some people call them the House and Senate respectively) to change copyright law for their benefit? Mickey Mouse was supposed to go public domain in the 1990s and they extended copyright to 90+ years, then to 120 or something years.
Where corporate interests are concerned, they will always change the rules of the game if it benefits them. New York Times actually published a study showing that the average American has no more effect on his country’s legislation than the average Russian. The United States’ democracy includes a lot of Legal Persons who have freedoms and no responsibility – that’s a Corporation for you. These guys enjoy very little and sometimes no taxation, but get all the representation. Frankly I am scared to death of this democracy because I see it spreading to my country too, which despite being an electoral monarchy (people worship and vote for their founding father/ mini God, the Lee Dynasty which is basically a more competent and less tyrannical version of NKorea's Kim dynasty), at least was not controlled by large corporations.
-
This is the future, companies need to just accept it and move the **** on.
Ivan, I normally have the highest respect for you, but here you are sounding like an idealistic kid.
Accept and move on?
Do you know that companies (Disney being the main culprit) got the Hustlers and the Scalawags (some people call them the House and Senate respectively) to change copyright law for their benefit? Mickey Mouse was supposed to go public domain in the 1990s and they extended copyright to 90+ years, then to 120 or something years.
Where corporate interests are concerned, they will always change the rules of the game if it benefits them. New York Times actually published a study showing that the average American has no more effect on his country’s legislation than the average Russian. The United States’ democracy includes a lot of Legal Persons who have freedoms and no responsibility – that’s a Corporation for you. These guys enjoy very little and sometimes no taxation, but get all the representation. Frankly I am scared to death of this democracy because I see it spreading to my country too, which despite being an electoral monarchy (people worship and vote for their founding father/ mini God, the Lee Dynasty which is basically a more competent and less tyrannical version of NKorea's Kim dynasty), at least was not controlled by large corporations.
I'm pretty sure you just defended his point. :P
-
I'm gonna go bust 'em out
-
This is the future, companies need to just accept it and move the **** on.
Ivan, I normally have the highest respect for you, but here you are sounding like an idealistic kid.
Accept and move on?
Do you know that companies (Disney being the main culprit) got the Hustlers and the Scalawags (some people call them the House and Senate respectively) to change copyright law for their benefit? Mickey Mouse was supposed to go public domain in the 1990s and they extended copyright to 90+ years, then to 120 or something years.
I'm pretty sure you just defended his point. :P
I think berserkfan means that thinking that companies will accept it and move on is overly idealistic. While I think they both agree that's what should happen, I agree with berserkfan that is probably never will.
-
If the guys behind TPB are rightfully in jail for making a website with *links* to content, because it causes financial loses for the entertainment industry…
…then the RedTube/XVideos/… stuff ought to be shot right away, because masturbation lowers birth rates.
Given the level of population, wouldn't the lowering of birth rate be a good thing?
Depends which population.
Given the current state of entertainment industry, wouldn't be lowering the money flow a good thing?
True, which is why I'm pro murder
we just need to get a good PR company behind abortion and we're set
-
If the guys behind TPB are rightfully in jail for making a website with *links* to content, because it causes financial loses for the entertainment industry…
…then the RedTube/XVideos/… stuff ought to be shot right away, because masturbation lowers birth rates.
Given the level of population, wouldn't the lowering of birth rate be a good thing?
Depends which population.
Given the current state of entertainment industry, wouldn't be lowering the money flow a good thing?
True, which is why I'm pro murder
we just need to get a good PR company behind abortion and we're set
Mmmmm...abortions make me HUNGRY!
-
I think they are scumbags who have been unfairly treated.
The was Peter Sunde is treated in prison is shameful for the Swedish justice system.
-
your intellectual property rights stop as soon post it online its as simple as that...
No, the copyright to your work is implicitly yours unless you have some way agreed to give it up. It does not matter how it is has been published.
The piratebay guys have probably inflicted at least a billion dollars' of losses on copyright holders.
And that's even a quite high estimate. It's hard to say what amount of damage torrenting has inflicted. In many cases people will download something because it's free and easy, and not even consume it.
I don't know how many times I have just got something from the Internet that I would have right to consume otherwise, just because it is easier.
Weird "copy protection" on the CD I just bought so it doesn't work in my player? Download!
Missed the last episode of a TV show when it aired but the TV-channel's free "play" service has a crappy player? Download!
Want to review a scene in an old movie, but I would have to first look it up in the DVD shelf and then skip back and forwards to the scene? Search for keywords on Youtube for a copy that someone has uploaded there.
-
if information is free and i was born with the right to it, does that mean i have the right to go to bestbuy, find an album. open the packaging, put the cd into my laptop, copy the songs onto my hardrive, and then put the cd inside the cd case and onto the shelf where i found it?
i mean, nothing physical was stolen. i guess the store lost some plastic wrap packaging, but what if i brought my ow plastic wrap sealing machine?
will everyone here pay for my bail if they end up calling the cops
-
If the guys behind TPB are rightfully in jail for making a website with *links* to content, because it causes financial loses for the entertainment industry…
…then the RedTube/XVideos/… stuff ought to be shot right away, because masturbation lowers birth rates.
Given the level of population, wouldn't the lowering of birth rate be a good thing?
Depends which population.
Given the current state of entertainment industry, wouldn't be lowering the money flow a good thing?
True, which is why I'm pro murder
we just need to get a good PR company behind abortion and we're set
Mmmmm...abortions make me HUNGRY!
Well, that's a start I guess...
-
Just going to drop my opnion onto piracy :
As long as pirating will be simpler than paying for your content , I'll keep on downloading .
Half of my downloads are probably unfoundable in France . We have no legit download platform , should I go to store , buy a 30$ bluray, rip the movie to drop it onto my NAS ? No **** it , Torrenting is easier .
Maybe when Netflix arrive to France , but habbits ...
-
The was Peter Sunde is treated in prison is shameful for the Swedish justice system.
i don't follow the news... does he not get enough sweets? or maybe he's restricted from sauna?
-
i don't follow the news... does he not get enough sweets? or maybe he's restricted from sauna?
I suppose that Russian jails are a bit harsher than Swedish in general, but the treatment does not fit the crime by Swedish standards.
He is holed up at a maximum security facility together with murderers, drug dealers and child molesters ... who enjoy more freedoms than him.
-
I suppose that Russian jails are a bit harsher than Swedish in general
no sweets in russian prisons. only sugar in pieces and marmalade. gyms are awfully equipped.
He is holed up at a maximum security facility together with murderers, drug dealers and child molesters ... who enjoy more freedoms than him.
drug dealers and child molesters have maximum security? wow. hope they are at least in the same boat with your violent gangsters.
-
drug dealers and child molesters have maximum security? wow. hope they are at least in the same boat with your violent gangsters.
Sweden is that type of country which is so humane, maximum security prison is like paradise for African refugees. He's probably getting full wifi internet access, spas, lobster dinners, massage machines, and more. About the only thing he isn't getting, is out.
-
drug dealers and child molesters have maximum security? wow. hope they are at least in the same boat with your violent gangsters.
Sweden is that type of country which is so humane, maximum security prison is like paradise for African refugees. He's probably getting full wifi internet access, spas, lobster dinners, massage machines, and more. About the only thing he isn't getting, is out.
Isn't the point of prison to try and rehabilitate criminals to be able live with the rest of us? And if not to separate them from the rest of society so they can do no more harm?
-
I am a firm believer in capital punishment although not for the "punishment" aspect of it.
Minor criminals can and should be rehabilitated and retrained to take their place in society.
However, I also think that the human population of the world is an order of magnitude greater than it should be, so, far from believing that "all life is sacred" I think that we should make great efforts to limit growth and cull out the diseased portion.
If you look at the human race as a single organism, executing a murderer or child molester is pretty much the same as cutting out a cancer.
The "punishment" aspect is just to call attention to and warn would-be future offenders.
-
If you look at the human race as a single organism, executing a murderer or child molester is pretty much the same as cutting out a cancer.
And if that organism simply killed everything it didn't understand on sight, soon as a more complicated illness came up it would fall apart and kill its self.
Capital punishment is perhaps the most short sighted sentence you could hope to give. Understanding what makes murders, rapists and other horrible people what they are, is the key to solving those problems, if you refuse or fail to do so, your no better than the murders, rapists etc....
-
If you look at the human race as a single organism, executing a murderer or child molester is pretty much the same as cutting out a cancer.
And if that organism simply killed everything it didn't understand on sight, soon as a more complicated illness came up it would fall apart and kill its self.
Capital punishment is perhaps the most short sighted sentence you could hope to give. Understanding what makes murders, rapists and other horrible people what they are, is the key to solving those problems, if you refuse or fail to do so, your no better than the murders, rapists etc....
I am a firm believer in capital punishment although not for the "punishment" aspect of it.
Minor criminals can and should be rehabilitated and retrained to take their place in society.
However, I also think that the human population of the world is an order of magnitude greater than it should be, so, far from believing that "all life is sacred" I think that we should make great efforts to limit growth and cull out the diseased portion.
If you look at the human race as a single organism, executing a murderer or child molester is pretty much the same as cutting out a cancer.
The "punishment" aspect is just to call attention to and warn would-be future offenders.
There is a big generation gap here, Fohat. And I am closer in age to you than baldgye which is why I agree with you much more.
In any case my empathy is always with the victims and not the perpetuators/ victimizers.
-
...How old are you then? And how old am I?
-
WE HAD FUN
-
NOW PROCEED TO KILL PAICRAI
-
I wonder how this all relates to fake clacks? :)) Intellectual property rights really matter when someone infringes on the rights of 'one of our own' but the IP rights of others (specifically, thosewith more money) then they don't matter?
At some point we'll be in a media-free state; no discs, tapes, nothing -- it'll all be rights management. Companies will manage who has paid for the right to watch a particular film, video, etc. -- and consumers will just confirm they have the right, and enjoy the media, from anywhere. And the purchasing of those rights will be so small that stealing (that's what it is folks) just won't seem worth the energy.
This is the same way iTunes cut down on pirating of music. Sure, you can still hunt down the song you want and pirate it, but why -- it's so cheap it hardly seems worth the effort.
-
This is the same way iTunes cut down on pirating of music. Sure, you can still hunt down the song you want and pirate it, but why -- it's so cheap it hardly seems worth the effort.
Meanwhile, Bruce ****inson says Apple has killed music sales… and proceeds to talk about how it doesn't matter.
-
I wonder how this all relates to fake clacks? :)) Intellectual property rights really matter when someone infringes on the rights of 'one of our own' but the IP rights of others (specifically, thosewith more money) then they don't matter?
inorite?
-
I wonder how this all relates to fake clacks? :)) Intellectual property rights really matter when someone infringes on the rights of 'one of our own' but the IP rights of others (specifically, thosewith more money) then they don't matter?
inorite?
I'm quoting you not to accuse you, but to respond to you.
I hear a lot of people wanting to treat the rich differently (ie, tax them more because they can handle it, etc.). And now I'm hearing people say that we should treat them the same because it's IP and we shouldn't just favour the little guy.
I feel confident that I know where krogenar stands on this (treat them the same in both cases), but I'm wondering now - are the two groups of people that are saying these conflicting (IMO) things indeed two different groups, the same people and are confused, or the same people and value these two situation differently enough to have "conflicting" positions?
I don't even know if I expect you to respond, baldgye, since this might be a fairly loaded question, but oh well. :))
-
I wonder how this all relates to fake clacks? :)) Intellectual property rights really matter when someone infringes on the rights of 'one of our own' but the IP rights of others (specifically, thosewith more money) then they don't matter?
inorite?
I'm quoting you not to accuse you, but to respond to you.
I hear a lot of people wanting to treat the rich differently (ie, tax them more because they can handle it, etc.). And now I'm hearing people say that we should treat them the same because it's IP and we shouldn't just favour the little guy.
I feel confident that I know where krogenar stands on this (treat them the same in both cases), but I'm wondering now - are the two groups of people that are saying these conflicting (IMO) things indeed two different groups, the same people and are confused, or the same people and value these two situation differently enough to have "conflicting" positions?
I don't even know if I expect you to respond, baldgye, since this might be a fairly loaded question, but oh well. :))
I recall an African-American comedian who told a joke right after the L.A. Rights. He starts out by moving his arms frantically in front of him, chanting, "NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE! NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE! NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE!" Then he pauses, and with a confused, slightly annoyed look on his face says, "... NO MEDIUMS? Small, large, XL.... no mediums? WTF?"
It's not about 'justice' - it's about taking things that aren't yours. When someone sees a Clack but doesn't like the price tag, or having to take their chances in a lottery, and buys (or makes) a fake Clack, they're stealing from someone else. That's no different from stealing movies or music. The only difference is who gets hurt.
As for whether there are two different groups at GH who hold these two different attitudes -- there's an easy way to find out. If all the people who supported PirateBay are willing to say that they also support the manufacturing of fake Clacks, then we have our answer. So sound off guys -- who supports fake Clacks?
And to be honest -- I'm not claiming to be a saint in this area. But I'm not waving a red flag saying I do it for 'justice' or some nonsense, either. The 'social justice' crap is just draped over it to make it sound more 'respectable'.
-
I wonder how this all relates to fake clacks? :)) Intellectual property rights really matter when someone infringes on the rights of 'one of our own' but the IP rights of others (specifically, thosewith more money) then they don't matter?
inorite?
I'm quoting you not to accuse you, but to respond to you.
I hear a lot of people wanting to treat the rich differently (ie, tax them more because they can handle it, etc.). And now I'm hearing people say that we should treat them the same because it's IP and we shouldn't just favour the little guy.
I feel confident that I know where krogenar stands on this (treat them the same in both cases), but I'm wondering now - are the two groups of people that are saying these conflicting (IMO) things indeed two different groups, the same people and are confused, or the same people and value these two situation differently enough to have "conflicting" positions?
I don't even know if I expect you to respond, baldgye, since this might be a fairly loaded question, but oh well. :))
In the context of this thread;
The way I see it is that stealing is stealing... it dsn't really matter who you steal from. It was something that I learn't as a teenager growing up with the ever increasing and varied number of p2p clients and then torrent sites/clients.
With piracy it all comes down to morals I think, if you don't want to pay the multi-national company for X then stealing it only tells them that your a group of people they need to shut down to FORCE you to pay, but if you simply don't buy X then what your telling them is that they need to change X or offer it in a different way. It's why the iTunes store has dominated and has so much power now.
But I'm with you in that people can have conflicting opinions with both of those opinions still being valid.
I too feel that taxes (for example) should be proportional to your earnings, becasue I'm of the opinion that greed is one of the great evils of our society. The fact that 1% of our global population has 50% of the wealth, yet millions of people still live in poverty is pretty awful and taxation is one of the only ways in which governments can hope to re-balance that wealth.
When it comes to IP and who owns what I think you have to judge that for what it is, an item, a 'thing'. It's pretty bizarre to suddenly start to rationalise stealing based on who made it. If you have a problem with the people who made something, and it's origins and supporting that with your money, you just shouldn't consume it at all.
I hope some of that makes sense, being pretty dyslexic I find it pretty difficult to convey **** like this in text in a way that any human would hope to follow lol
And ofc I would reply! This is suppose to be a 'forum'! ;)
-
Autorship and monopoly on copying are two completely different things.
-
rich ****s should definitely pay more. the problem is, since 2015 i will be in the category of rich ****s myself, according to russian laws. but in 2015 i will be living in another country. CHECKMATE, GOVERNMENT!