EFF petition
- Thread starter Bozo
- Start date
Stereodude
Not really a
Added my name...
ddrueding
Fixture
And mine...and I signed up the Bartender for fun 
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
ddrueding said:And mine...and I signed up the Bartender for fun
Wait until he hears about this once he gets back.
As little as I like the tactics that he RIAA uses, I think they have a point when defending their copyrights against mass infrigements. They really need to discourage stealing on a mass scale. To effect change on a mass scale, they need teeth and they need lots of very negative publicity as they enforce their ownership rights. People need to think twice before stealing and that is not gonna happen if they don't think they can get caught and that there isn't a signifigent penalty when they do.
If parents are not going to teach their children what is stealing and why they shouldn't, then they get what they deserve in legal hassles. It really doesn't matter what RIAA does or what the penalties are, if you aren't doing the crime. To my knowledge, I have yet to see where the RIAA has gone after someone that is totally innocent. As a side note, guardians of children are not inocents because they are responsible for their charges!
-- Let the flaming begine --
If parents are not going to teach their children what is stealing and why they shouldn't, then they get what they deserve in legal hassles. It really doesn't matter what RIAA does or what the penalties are, if you aren't doing the crime. To my knowledge, I have yet to see where the RIAA has gone after someone that is totally innocent. As a side note, guardians of children are not inocents because they are responsible for their charges!
-- Let the flaming begine --
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I don't think it's stealing to copy a bunch of bits. Sorry. I don't. That's the wrong word to use to describe trading digital information. The original data still exists. Someone got paid for it. It's not like I took a physical, depletable item off a store shelf so that no one else can have it. Copying digital data is no more "theft" than checking out a cute girl is "rape."
It's not even worth debating the topic until the side that calls it "stealing" or "piracy" can bother to use some more rational term.
That said, I think the government of the USA is failing the public in a very real and substantial way. This is just one example.
It's not even worth debating the topic until the side that calls it "stealing" or "piracy" can bother to use some more rational term.
That said, I think the government of the USA is failing the public in a very real and substantial way. This is just one example.
Sol
Storage is cool
I agree that stealing just isn't the right term, and perhaps more relevantly the laws of most countries would seem to agree with me (Although the American government seem to be trying to make it worse which seems a little strange to me).
That's not to say that I think the indescriminant copying of somone elses intelectual property is justifiable, but I can't say I think it's any more reprehensible than using an established possition of power to dictate the terms under which people may use a product they have paid for. You can't stop someone from loaning thier friend a book. You can't say that people need to buy another copy of a DVD if more than one person is going to sit down and watch it. You can't sell someone a family sedan and then forbid them from ever using it to transport anyone outside of thier family. What if all the dairy companies lobbied to make it illegal for people to use store bought yougurt to culture thier own yougurt from milk? What if they demanded a levy on milk sales to make up for thier lost yougurt money? Logic would dictate that they get laughed out of court, but histroy would suggest that, in the US at least, they'd get exactly what they wanted as long as they had the money to grease the right palms.
Yes people need to be paid for the content they create, otherwise where is the motivation to create more. But to give wide reaching rights to control other peoples useage of a product to a group with a vested interest in milking the viewing/listening public for all they can get is stupid, shotsighted and disrespectful of those peoples rights.
That's not to say that I think the indescriminant copying of somone elses intelectual property is justifiable, but I can't say I think it's any more reprehensible than using an established possition of power to dictate the terms under which people may use a product they have paid for. You can't stop someone from loaning thier friend a book. You can't say that people need to buy another copy of a DVD if more than one person is going to sit down and watch it. You can't sell someone a family sedan and then forbid them from ever using it to transport anyone outside of thier family. What if all the dairy companies lobbied to make it illegal for people to use store bought yougurt to culture thier own yougurt from milk? What if they demanded a levy on milk sales to make up for thier lost yougurt money? Logic would dictate that they get laughed out of court, but histroy would suggest that, in the US at least, they'd get exactly what they wanted as long as they had the money to grease the right palms.
Yes people need to be paid for the content they create, otherwise where is the motivation to create more. But to give wide reaching rights to control other peoples useage of a product to a group with a vested interest in milking the viewing/listening public for all they can get is stupid, shotsighted and disrespectful of those peoples rights.