Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 44

Thread: r.i.a.a

  1. #1
    Veteran Member darkness's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    189
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default r.i.a.a

    any input on your thoughts on file sharing?

  2. #2
    God/dess Rhiannon's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Lil Rhody
    Posts
    10,471
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    I'm all for file-sharing. I send and receive files, and I'm not ashamed of it. I very rarely download through P2P networks anymore though. I belong to several e-mail lists, and we do it all through there. I also download things other than music. Hell, I've even downloaded movies that had just been released in theaters.

    I think the music industry needs to quit their bitching. When CDs come out, they are close to $20. Maybe lowering the prices may help the illegal downloading. Not all of us are rich like them and can afford them.

    I do like the idea of paying a monthly fee and downloading all you want legally, though. AOL does it, along with others.

  3. #3
    Veteran Member Pumpkin Pie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    718
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    I did a white paper about this for one of my marketing clients. : Here's a link to the publicly-released version of it: http://www.scottjensenshow.com/P2PRevolution.pdf

    I'm also about to start filming and releasing free-for-download over p2p networks a talk show I'm hosting. Here's a link to the show's website: http://www.scottjensenshow.com/

    :grin:
    Have a question about boarding schools?
    Get it answered at Boarding School Forums.

  4. #4
    Featured Member ami's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2004
    Location
    midwest
    Posts
    1,074
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhiannon link=board=1;threadid=8788;start=msg103463#msg1034 63 date=1083356875
    ......I think the music industry needs to quit their bitching. When CDs come out, they are close to $20. Maybe lowering the prices may help the illegal downloading. Not all of us are rich like them and can afford them.....
    exactly


    besides for many many years you can record a song off the radio FOR FREE, and not have feds hunting you down.

  5. #5
    Banned Blade's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Road To Hell
    Posts
    5,171
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhiannon link=board=1;threadid=8788;start=msg103463#msg1034 63 date=1083356875
    I'm all for file-sharing. I send and receive files, and I'm not ashamed of it. I very rarely download through P2P networks anymore though. I belong to several e-mail lists, and we do it all through there. I also download things other than music. Hell, I've even downloaded movies that had just been released in theaters.

    I think the music industry needs to quit their bitching. When CDs come out, they are close to $20. Maybe lowering the prices may help the illegal downloading. Not all of us are rich like them and can afford them.

    Damn Rhia..hook a brother up! As far as the riaa goes fuck them! Ever borrow a friends cds or records? Did you tape em? then you are guilty!

  6. #6
    Veteran Member SexyJess's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    529
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    I agree completely with Rhiannon and Ami. I'm all for it. I did an article about this for the school paper a few years ago, and everyone I interviewed said they still buy CD's. If I download a song by a band, and I like it, I'll go buy the CD!
    Besides, despite the bad publicity file-sharing has gotten lately, most artists really don't care. Every recording artist/band member I've asked (my best friend's job perks include rubbing elbows with celebs and he occasionally indulges me and lets me go, bless him, lol) say they don't mind it. In fact, some say it boosts their record sales. Metallica needs to chill.

  7. #7
    Veteran Member Pumpkin Pie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    718
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Quote Originally Posted by SexyJess link=board=1;threadid=8788;start=msg103522#msg1035 22 date=1083364686
    Besides, despite the bad publicity file-sharing has gotten lately, most artists really don't care. Every recording artist/band member I've asked (my best friend's job perks include rubbing elbows with celebs and he occasionally indulges me and lets me go, bless him, lol) say they don't mind it. In fact, some say it boosts their record sales. Metallica needs to chill.
    When I was doing research for my white paper, I talked to a lot of bands and they said the same thing. However, very few will say it publicly as they still fear being dropped by their record company if they do. However, very few bands make any meaningful amount of money from record sales. Where they make their big bucks is ticket sales to their live concerts and the merchandise sales made there. However, there is a music artist that has publicly spoken out and, due to exchanged emails, she was great help with my white paper. She has publicly posted two papers about this. They're located here: http://www.janisian.com/article-internet_debacle.html

    And when I publicly released my pro-p2p white paper, I was interviewed on lots of radio talk shows. Here's one (40+ top markets, millions of listeners) that makes their episodes available on the web and where my interview is still available for download: http://thedavidlawrenceshow.com/001552.html It was my first interview and I was not as smooth as I wish I had been and was in later interviews.

    Later when the RIAA sued the single working mother of a 12-year-old girl who was downloading, I sent out a letter-to-the-editor that got carried by over 100 newspapers nation-wide (including the New York Post). Here's a link to where it appeared in one of them: http://www.rcreader.com/display_arti...x=1&artid=1505

    Have a question about boarding schools?
    Get it answered at Boarding School Forums.

  8. #8
    God/dess Rhiannon's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Lil Rhody
    Posts
    10,471
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Quote Originally Posted by Blade is a D.j. link=board=1;threadid=8788;start=msg103516#msg1035 16 date=1083363650
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhiannon link=board=1;threadid=8788;start=msg103463#msg1034 63 date=1083356875
    I'm all for file-sharing. I send and receive files, and I'm not ashamed of it. I very rarely download through P2P networks anymore though. I belong to several e-mail lists, and we do it all through there. I also download things other than music. Hell, I've even downloaded movies that had just been released in theaters.

    I think the music industry needs to quit their bitching. When CDs come out, they are close to $20. Maybe lowering the prices may help the illegal downloading. Not all of us are rich like them and can afford them.

    Damn Rhia..hook a brother up! As far as the riaa goes fuck them! Ever borrow a friends cds or records? Did you tape em? then you are guilty!
    Hehe Blade.. Whatcha need? I'm sure I'll have it. As quite a few people know from chat, at last count, my CD collection was up to 978. Those are all that I have bought. We won't even go into how many I've burned with my own mixes from downloading.. LOL.

    I usually download the first 2 new songs off an album. If I like those, I buy the CD. This comes from years of buying CDs for one or two songs, and finding out that the rest of the albums sucked.

    My best friend, who lives in TN and I frequently mail new cds back and forth. If he buys one he loves, he'll burn me a copy and ship it right off to me. I do the same.

    I'm evil.. And I'll probably go to hell, when 1) I start believing in hell (yeah, right) lol, and 2) I get directions.

    Movie downloading has gotten just as bad, although they're just starting to make a big deal of it now, since the RIAA pitched their little hissy fit. You'd be surprised how many I've downloaded that were screening copies. This means that a critic, or other movie authority is also outraged at insane movie theater prices, and decides to help people who want to see the movie, but not pay the $10+ to do so. I actually love when they do that. Nice clean copies.. heh

    :grin:

  9. #9
    God/dess montythegeek's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    2,103
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    As a person who makes a living working for a company which sells its intelectual property for a lot of money, I have to disagree with the majority of respondents so far.

    I view illegal copies of cd's, software, and movies as the equivalent of stowing away on a commercial airplane. It costs the airline virtually nothing to fly 200 pounds from LA to NY--maybe a buck more than an empty seat. The empty airplane weights 1000 times as much as all the passengers combined. With theft, all the airlines would be bankrupt.

    In the company I work for, illegal copies of software are grounds for immediate dismissal, and there have been people fired for it. I own no copyright violating items. I have copied a few cd's but just for archival purpose in case the original is damaged (which is legal).

    CD's at $20 came out in 1980 and if the price had risen with the general price level they would be $40. A 45 rpm single in 1967 was $0.99 the equivalent in todays prices of nearly $5 for 2 songs. If you don't want to pay for it, don't steal it, wite and perform it yourself. Same as getting a lap dance and refusing to pay "since it wasn't that good."

  10. #10
    Featured Member Chili Palmer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2004
    Location
    In the locker room, but I don't see you here
    Posts
    1,247
    Thanks
    95
    Thanked 475 Times in 164 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Yet another ironic discussion.

    I believe every dancer in this thread who has no problems stealing the fruits of another's labor has complained in other threads about how much the club/waitresses/bouncers/DJs take from their (lapdancing) efforts.

    You are absolutely correct when you state that CDs are overpriced. That doesn't make stealing music an acceptable alternative, regardless of the numbers doing it.

    CP

  11. #11
    Veteran Member Pumpkin Pie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    718
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Montythegeek,

    My white paper is about a new business model for the p2p reality. My posts and other links to other musings of mine didn't advocate or endorse copyright theft. However...

    Copyrights are a modern legal concept and have a limited lifespan. After that lifespan, the copyrighted material becomes public domain. No government thinks copyrights should be immortal. And how long copyrights hold legal force has not been the same since they were created. Not to mention that they're different for individuals as opposed to corporations. So what you're really all just arguing about is when intellectual property should become public domain ... and, for some, whether copyrights is a legitimate concept in the first place.

    And to make the matter even more gray, all computers and computer languages were developed by governments (militaries and government-funded universities) so, from some people's view (not necessarily mine), to copyright it is to steal a publicly funded and held property and claim it as your own. And if you say government cannot hold copyrights or government copyrights should eventually expire, that doesn't help your argument. Just food for thought, Montythegeek.
    Have a question about boarding schools?
    Get it answered at Boarding School Forums.

  12. #12
    God/dess lestat1's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2002
    Location
    NY Capital District
    Posts
    3,775
    Thanks
    758
    Thanked 1,943 Times in 696 Posts
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Quote Originally Posted by Chili Palmer link=board=1;threadid=8788;start=msg103641#msg1036 41 date=1083382198
    Yet another ironic discussion.

    I believe every dancer in this thread who has no problems stealing the fruits of another's labor has complained in other threads about how much the club/waitresses/bouncers/DJs take from their (lapdancing) efforts.

    You are absolutely correct when you state that CDs are overpriced. That doesn't make stealing music an acceptable alternative, regardless of the numbers doing it.

    CP
    I would tend to agree, even though I download an awful lot of .mp3s myself. I rationalize it as "stealing from criminals" however. Did anyone else join the class-action suit against all those music companies that got together to form an illegal cartel and institute price-fixing on CDs? I received a small check in the mail when we one, though not enough to make up for the price-fixing. I might have some sympathy for the riaa if they weren't screwing over both talent and customers. A really good artist might manage to get a deal where thery get 10 cents from a CD sale. I don't know why the artists are complaining, they could make a fortune by doing away with the studios and seeling direct to consumers over the web, cutting out the middle man.
    Quote Originally Posted by _Avery_ View Post
    omg, why is it so huge?!! lol lol

  13. #13
    God/dess Bridgette's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Gettin the fuck outta Dodge!
    Posts
    14,241
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Pretty much everyone has said for years that the only reason Metallica's record sales have dropped is their music sucks in recent years! I used to be a big Metallica fan, but I haven't heard anything new of theirs I liked in years. Apparently neither have alot of people. I haven't heard of any other artist/band complaining as loudly as them.

    I am all for file-sharing. The entertainment industry simply needs to stop fighting the 'system' and work with it. Stupid fuckers would vastly improve their bottom lines if they stopped spending all that money on bullshit lawsuits and focused their efforts on creating systems that would allow the public to download everything we want for a reasonable monthly fee. I say that even though there are loads of free file-sharing programs out there, lots of people would switch and pay if there was a truly superior system where everything we want is readily available. I would and I know plenty of others who would - probably not everyone, but then not everyone who steals at the stores will quit that either.

    Do y'all know that every blank CDR you buy profits the entertainment industry? It's not like they're not getting something out of us 'thieves' who download and burn our own CDs!

    I also have to agree with what PP has to say about the length of copyrights and 'intellectual property'. It's one thing for an artist or company to outright copy and sell another's work without permission - it's entirely another for Joe Schmoe to copy it for personal use.

    And yeah, I started copying songs off the radio with my boombox when I was ten years old. Everyone I knew did the same and we damn well shared those copies. We didn't have money to buy all those tapes at $10 a pop for one damn song and we got tired of waiting through the bullshit on the radio to hear our fave songs. File-sharing is just an extension of that. I'm willing to bet that most, if not all, of the folks who support the RIAA used to participate in the tape sharing too!

    Oh yeah, about the price of CDs in 1980 vs now. Everyone knows any new 'tech' product is priced at astronomically high levels in the beginning, then when it becomes more popular and widely available, the price drops. My family's first microwave cost $600. I can go to Wal-Mart right now and get a microwave that is 10 times better than that old $600 one for $40! VCRs, stereo equipment, computers, etc are all cheaper and better than in previous years. So how come the price of CDs hasn't dropped accordingly???????? You can damn well bet the relative cost of producing one is cheaper than it was in 1980, and we all know the ARTISTS are not the ones getting a fat cut!

    Quote Originally Posted by pheno View Post
    When you lead a nontraditional life don't try to measure it with traditional milestones.

  14. #14
    God/dess Rhiannon's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Lil Rhody
    Posts
    10,471
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Well said, B. Couldn't agree more.


  15. #15
    God/dess Bridgette's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Gettin the fuck outta Dodge!
    Posts
    14,241
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    One more thing. Did anyone really win that lawsuit on price-fixing? As far as I'm concerned, the prices are still just as fixed and the entertainment CARTEL is still very much alive.

    Quote Originally Posted by pheno View Post
    When you lead a nontraditional life don't try to measure it with traditional milestones.

  16. #16
    Banned Madcap's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Saint effing Louis
    Posts
    6,804
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Hell, half the time the stuff being downloaded isn't even being sold! I practically beat my head against a wall trying to find "Liege and Leaf: Fairport convention" to no friggin' avail!

    So I just downloaded all the songs of Kazzalite k++ and set them on a cd accordingly. Tried to buy it legally, couldn't, therefore I got it one way or another.

    If they're not selling it, how can you steal it?

    Also, most people don't keep the mp3's on their drive indefinately. People sometimes have to reload their operating system and just aren't aware of stuff like Partition Magic, so they just KO the whole thing. The record industry gains more than it loses. Look at it this way, it's another way for bands to get their music out there to be appreciated. People will always want the cute packaging over a silver CD with sharpie writing on it.

    On all my CD's I have a copy. I burn the sucker so that I can leave the original in it's case and bang around a copy (let the copy get scratched up rather than the 20$ original), am I stealing by doing this? If the record industry was to have it's way, i would indeed be stealing. But, fuck 'em. I'll burn a copy so that i don't have to pay another 20$ for my 'GnR Lies' cd when it finally poops out.

    Put it this way... I see why the indistry is bitching (They are worried about making a few million less), but I don't feel bad for them a bit. Maybe they need to reinvent themselves, because the way it's looking they are going the way of the Dinosaur. They aren't needed anymore, and that scares the living shit outta them. And it should.

    Is filesharing stealing? Sometimes. Do I care? Not in the slightest bit.

  17. #17
    Veteran Member darkness's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    189
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    it's not stealing!downloading music off the internet has been going on for a long time.the only reason they are deciding to sue people for it is because record sales are down! i mean if this is such a big deal why didn't they sue people for copying tapes and giving it to there friends back in the day?

  18. #18
    God/dess Bridgette's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Gettin the fuck outta Dodge!
    Posts
    14,241
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Madcap you are right on about some stuff not even being available for sale. Lots of DJs are not releasing some of their work for sale at all, to protect 'its integrity' for spinning at clubs exclusively. WTF is that??? Producing music you can't even buy?

    Record sales are down because people are tired of paying stupid amounts of money just to get one or two songs they like. Sales also suffered because of tape sharing back in the day, it just wasn't as obvious because we were doing it in our bedrooms 'under the table' so to speak - file sharing is done online and anyone can go see the numbers of people involved. They just couldn't put a number on tape sharing because of the way it was done.

    Quote Originally Posted by pheno View Post
    When you lead a nontraditional life don't try to measure it with traditional milestones.

  19. #19
    Banned Madcap's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Saint effing Louis
    Posts
    6,804
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Back in the 80's they used to insist that "home recording s ruining the record industry!"

    It didn't.




    But, Darkness, sometimes it is stealing. You can sugarcoat it if you want, but getting a CD quality song without buying the CD is stealing. This doesn't extend to everything, but it does extend to some things. Say you like Lenny Kravitz (SP?), so you download all the songs off his newest album and burn them to CD in the order that they appear in the officially released album. You have Lenny Kraviz's new album... you didn't pay for it... how is that not stealing? Hate to dissagree with a hot chick with an avatar like yours, but Cest La Vi.

    Keep in mind, though, that you aren't generally stealing from the band. The Band has generally already been paid. You are stealing from the 'robber baron' record label.

  20. #20
    God/dess Rhiannon's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Lil Rhody
    Posts
    10,471
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Just a little idea of how outrageous the prices are. When I bought "The Eminem Show" back a year or so ago, I paid $26.99 for it. Ridiculous, isn't it? Luckily though, a few stores in my area buy your old CDs and give you either cash or credit. I normally take them there after I copy them, and get credit, so that I can use it towards a CD that I do want. Then, the cycle continues.

    My sister, on the other hand, does things a little differently. She buys a CD, copies it to a new disc, keeps the copy, and goes right to the store, and sells the original back to them. She doesn't get what she paid for it, of course, just as I don't get the amount I paid for the CD in credit. But, the advantage to the store, is that they get to buy the used CD for a fraction of its original price, and then mark it back up and sell it in their used CD bin. The advantage for the customers, is that they can normally find the CD they want in the used bin, for less than it would cost brand new. The advantage for the stores, is that they get to sell the same CD twice, sometimes even more, and still make their profits.

    I guess I could see the RIAA's point, if someone was burning the original CD's or collections of MP3's and selling them for a profit. But file-sharing isn't doing that. They can take all the steps that they feel they need to, in order to combat file-sharing, but it will never stop it. People will always find another way. Yeah, it's not right, but that's the way it is.


  21. #21
    Veteran Member Pumpkin Pie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    718
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Quote Originally Posted by Madcap link=board=1;threadid=8788;start=msg103949#msg1039 49 date=1083442992
    But, Darkness, sometimes it is stealing. You can sugarcoat it if you want, but getting a CD quality song without buying the CD is stealing. This doesn't extend to everything, but it does extend to some things. Say you like Lenny Kravitz (SP?), so you download all the songs off his newest album and burn them to CD in the order that they appear in the officially released album. You have Lenny Kraviz's new album... you didn't pay for it... how is that not stealing? Hate to dissagree with a hot chick with an avatar like yours, but Cest La Vi.
    Copyrights are not written in stone or ordained by God. They're a modern legal concept. In the US, they were created "to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." That's Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US Constitution. And the first "limited times" was only fourteen years with a possible fourteen year extension. If that was still law, any book, movie, song, or other intellectual property before 1976 would be public domain right now. So copyrights are about "when" and nothing else. Well, almost nothing else.

    Copyrights can vary from country to country. While file-sharing of copyrighted music is illegal here in the US, it isn't in Canada. And there are many countries where there are no copyright laws at all. So not only is copyrights only about "when", but they're also about where that "when" is.

    Now you are right, Madcap, that copying copyrighted music in the US is illegal within the current government-given time limit of their exclusive natures, but that doesn't mean current copyright laws are good laws. Nor does it mean that those that break them are necessarily evil or in the wrong. Afterall...

    At one time in the US, it was legal to buy, sell, and own a human. To "free" a slave was theft in the eyes of the law. Did people do it? Yes, the Underground Railroad's sole purpose was to break the law. Were they wrong to do so? Today, we say they weren't. We say no one can own another person's life. And today...

    There's beginning another argument about who owns language and intellectual properties. No invention in history was developed only by one person. All owe to previous inventions of other humans. From the invention of the wheel forward. And no piece of music has no similarities to past pieces of music. Same goes for books, movies, and any other intellectual property. Toss into this that many of those works owe a great deal to public funding for them to come about ... for example, anything to do with computers ... and the debate can be seen to lean even further to the side of those that object to current copyright laws.

    Not that I'm advocating the scrapping of copyright laws. I'm not. What I am advocating is that those that are against file-sharing realize that they're standing on very shaky ground that I would advise great caution when trying to build an argument on.

    And, as I outlined in my white paper on this topic (http://www.scottjensenshow.com/P2PRevolution.pdf), the only ones that are really going to hurt from p2p are the middlemen and gatekeepers. As for them...

    Keep in mind, though, that you aren't generally stealing from the band. The Band has generally already been paid. You are stealing from the 'robber baron' record label.

    Right now there is a growing movement amongst artists to strip corporations (record companies, book publishers, movie studios, and so forth) of owning copyrights for long periods of time. During my research for my white paper, I talked to many creators (musicians, writers, inventors, etc.) that wanted all copyrights to revert back to the creator after only a few years. Are they wrong to want that? "the Congress shall have power . . . to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." Note nowhere in that was mentioned their employers or their stockholders.

    Just dishing up another plate of food for thought.
    Have a question about boarding schools?
    Get it answered at Boarding School Forums.

  22. #22
    God/dess montythegeek's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    2,103
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Quote Originally Posted by Pumpkin Pie link=board=1;threadid=8788;start=msg103651#msg1036 51 date=1083383082
    Montythegeek,


    Copyrights are a modern legal concept and have a limited lifespan. After that lifespan, the copyrighted material becomes public domain. No government thinks copyrights should be immortal. And how long copyrights hold legal force has not been the same since they were created. Not to mention that they're different for individuals as opposed to corporations. So what you're really all just arguing about is when intellectual property should become public domain ... and, for some, whether copyrights is a legitimate concept in the first place.

    And to make the matter even more gray, all computers and computer languages were developed by governments (militaries and government-funded universities) so, from some people's view (not necessarily mine), to copyright it is to steal a publicly funded and held property and claim it as your own. And if you say government cannot hold copyrights or government copyrights should eventually expire, that doesn't help your argument. Just food for thought, Montythegeek.
    Yes a copyright is and should be, a limited right. Current law is to too long and approaches a perpetual right as extended. As for the validity of copyrights tell it to the Supreme Court which has upheld them numerous times, both in theory and as applied over a very long time. Do you want Dr. King's "I have a Dream" speech hawking Cialis or Viagra?

    The English language is not owned by anyone, either and neither are the elements in the periodic table. The constition specifically grants the right to patent tranformations of those elements in inventions. No own owns iron and carbon either, does that mean I can steal your car? A computer program is a configuration of code in a particular fashion to do a particular useful task. No one owns the numerals, does that mean I can steal your social security number? No one owns Carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, and the other elements, Does that mean I can rape your wife, because she is made up of those things?

    And as a matter of fact Basic was written by two professors from Dartmouth College and if I remember correctly unix was written by AT&T. Others were writtten by universities and put in the public domain or the rights to use them were sold. My hammer was made by a company and they do not own what I build with it.

  23. #23
    God/dess montythegeek's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    2,103
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Madcap, Darkness
    Until music was in digital form, any copy was inferior to the original. then 2 things had to catch up--the transfer mechanism and cheap CD burners (later supplanted by MP3 players for popularity).

    Try this, change your modem to 14.4 KBS and download a 4 minute song. It will take hours. That was the state of the art until 10 years ago Then came broadband and it became easy. But broadband was a tiny part of the market until 1998-99 and is still less than half of the access.

    Copying a cd for archival purposes is legal, and ethical. Taking it back to the store for credit is like taking back a dress you wore to a party, unless it is a used trade-in.


    As for the high moral tone of some correspondents. It does not cost you $30 to give a lap dance either. Maybe your costomers should all pay less because we do not get anything for the tipouts and the house mothers and no bouncer ever did anything for me either. And you can ride a bicycle to work, you do not need the $30K car. And all you need is a bed and a bar of soap, and you were born naked, so cistomers do not need to give you anything for that.

    And the performer and songwriter do get royalties for each sale.

  24. #24
    Veteran Member Pumpkin Pie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    718
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Quote Originally Posted by montythegeek link=board=1;threadid=8788;start=msg104121#msg1041 21 date=1083464717
    Yes a copyright is and should be, a limited right. Current law is to too long and approaches a perpetual right as extended.
    In Wheaton v. Peters (1831), the Supreme Court did make it clear that copyrights are not immortal. So at least we don't have that concern here in the US.

    As for the validity of copyrights tell it to the Supreme Court which has upheld them numerous times, both in theory and as applied over a very long time.
    The Supreme Court also upheld slavery. And all I'm saying by that is that the Supreme Court isn't perfect or always on the right side of an issue.

    Do you want Dr. King's "I have a Dream" speech hawking Cialis or Viagra?
    I wouldn't care in the slightest.

    The English language is not owned by anyone, either and neither are the elements in the periodic table.
    First one is correct, but the second one isn't. You need to read up the difference between intellectual property ownership and physical property ownership. Physical property is quite different from intellectual property. Intellectual property doesn't need a physical form whereas physical property does. And intellectual property can be replicated indefinitely and what makes up a physical property cannot be. The process for making that physical product can be, but not the materials used to make one of those end products.

    The constition specifically grants the right to patent tranformations of those elements in inventions.
    The process is different from the end product. The process is an intellectual property and the end product is a physical property.

    No own owns iron and carbon either, does that mean I can steal your car?
    The iron and carbon in my car is a physical property and thus different from intellectual property. If you want to argue the nuisances of physical property laws, we can ... but this thread is about intellectual properties.

    A computer program is a configuration of code in a particular fashion to do a particular useful task.
    Which is an intellectual property and thus can be replicated indefinitely.

    No one owns the numerals, does that mean I can steal your social security number?
    My social security number is merely another name for me. I am a physical property and not an intellectual property ... as some of my retractors would completely agree with. Thus to steal my social security number would be the theft of me.

    No one owns Carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, and the other elements, Does that mean I can rape your wife, because she is made up of those things?
    First, I'm unmarried. Second, even if I was married, I wouldn't own my wife. Third, my wife owns her body (a physical property) and your raping of her would be a crime against a physical property and not an intellectual property.

    And as a matter of fact Basic was written by two professors from Dartmouth College...
    A heavily publicly-funded institution. We even give it tax-exempt status as a non-profit.

    ...and if I remember correctly unix was written by AT&T.
    A pseudo-government organization as it was given a monopoly over telephone service.

    Others were writtten by universities and put in the public domain or the rights to use them were sold.
    Again, all heavily publicly-funded institutions.

    My hammer was made by a company and they do not own what I build with it.
    You really need to understand the difference between intellectual property rights and physical property rights. If you think they're one and the same, I'm more than willing to debate you on that topic ... but that isn't what this thread is about. It's about intellectual property rights.
    Have a question about boarding schools?
    Get it answered at Boarding School Forums.

  25. #25
    Veteran Member Pumpkin Pie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    718
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts

    Default Re:r.i.a.a

    Quote Originally Posted by montythegeek link=board=1;threadid=8788;start=msg104134#msg1041 34 date=1083467762
    Madcap, Darkness
    Until music was in digital form, any copy was inferior to the original. then 2 things had to catch up--the transfer mechanism and cheap CD burners (later supplanted by MP3 players for popularity).
    Actually, mp3s are inferior to the original. Mp3s use a compression technology to reduce the size of song files to what the AVERAGE ear can hear, which is a lot less than what the original recording picked up.

    As for the high moral tone of some correspondents. It does not cost you $30 to give a lap dance either. Maybe your costomers should all pay less because we do not get anything for the tipouts and the house mothers and no bouncer ever did anything for me either. And you can ride a bicycle to work, you do not need the $30K car. And all you need is a bed and a bar of soap, and you were born naked, so cistomers do not need to give you anything for that.
    You're getting intellectual property rights mixed up with physical property rights. The dancers are physical property which they themselves own. You paying for a lap dance isn't the purchasing of an intellectual property but the renting of a physical property. If you videotaped the dancer, the performance on the videotape would be an intellectual property, but the physical property rights over the dancer's body would not change.

    And the performer and songwriter do get royalties for each sale.
    You need to read up about the reality of the entertainment industry. Here's a songwriter's position papers about it: http://www.janisian.com/article-internet_debacle.html
    Have a question about boarding schools?
    Get it answered at Boarding School Forums.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •