nice tryJay wrote:
nice copypastaPubic wrote:
It shouldn't be referred to as "piracy". Piracy involves people on boats with guns robbing cruise liners, freighters etc. It also shouldn't be referred to as "theft". Theft involves non-consensual removal of a physical object. Even referring to it as "deprivation of revenue" is dubious, as there is no guarantee that someone who copies a movie or song would have purchased whatever it is which was copied.
What this is, is copyright infringement. It is immoral, yes, but to call it any of the terms listed above is to demonise it. Morally, I would say that for the end user its about as bad as dropping an empty soft drink can, not putting a dollar into the parking meter, or going 3 or 4kms over the speed limit.
Punishments typically meted out by governments around the world to the end user are highly disproportional to the crime. Would $20,000 and a three-month driving ban seem fair for a third parking ticket? No. So why should end-users be subject to this sort of bullshit? Why do movie & recording companies get such "special protection" for their industry?
Note: I'm only talking about little Johnny here downloading the latest Rihanna song or whatever, not massive DVD-copying sweatshops. Thats a completely different ballgame.
(just saw this)Uzique wrote:
and how does this help the artist, exactly? come on, don't be dumbJay wrote:
Or... buy used.
Surely by helping support the used CD/record market, you increase the re-sale price of a CD/record and thus it's value, which makes buying CDs more attractive which indirectly supports the artist, no?
I mean, just go on eBay and you can see (1st press, admittedly) Aphex Twin records in 'Good' condition with an asking price of £100. It's an out-of-production 'collectible' at this point, I realise, but the same used album in CD form (still in production) isn't going for that much lower than its RRP.
A good used market makes an album a better investment.
(that said, I bought a CD for 20p last night, lol)
you completely misunderstand the second hand market. people buy first edition vinyls to collect them. it completely leaves the artist's streams of revenue. people paying high prices for vinyl makes collectors rich, not the first artist. aphex hasn't seen any money from his vinyls since they were last pressed by his record company. the minute they enter the second-hand / discogs marketplace, he makes nothing. aren't you an economic student? how are you so dumb? people only buy old vinyl for collecting purposes... it's basically like investing in stocks with some records - you know their value will increase over time. they don't even get played. they're just bought as collectible items-- objects. if someone wanted to buy his music they'd probably buy the mp3's (at best), netting him 0.0001% of that second-hand vinyl. or, worse, they'll download his music and will fork out for the 'antique' item (i.e. nothing will go to the original artist).
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
He doesn't benefit unless he owns the used record shop or is selling them on ebay. The artist doesn't benefit directly, but the industry as a whole benefits. Just like with home sales, the real estate brokers don't care whether they sell new homes or used, but only new sales benefit the construction industry and increase national GDP.Jenspm wrote:
(just saw this)Uzique wrote:
and how does this help the artist, exactly? come on, don't be dumbJay wrote:
Or... buy used.
Surely by helping support the used CD/record market, you increase the re-sale price of a CD/record and thus it's value, which makes buying CDs more attractive which indirectly supports the artist, no?
I mean, just go on eBay and you can see (1st press, admittedly) Aphex Twin records in 'Good' condition with an asking price of £100. It's an out-of-production 'collectible' at this point, I realise, but the same used album in CD form (still in production) isn't going for that much lower than its RRP.
A good used market makes an album a better investment.
(that said, I bought a CD for 20p last night, lol)
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
No shit, Sherlock. The topic is about piracy, not the copy you legitimately bought.HaiBai wrote:
i own my computer and everything on it. as long as im not redistributing/reselling the work of other people, i'm fineJay wrote:
No, you agree to the EULA. You own nothing. You're a renter.HaiBai wrote:
well no, because something i download onto my computer is mine. the entire program is mine, and i can do anything i want with it
I think hes trying to say that because it is on his computer, he owns it. Kinda like claiming that if you steal something, then manage to put it in your house, you own it... or maybe he thinks you can rent a tv from one of those rental agencies, but as soon as its in his house , its his, regardless of whether the rental term is up.
I think it's more along the lines of, 'I bought it, I own it, I can give it to whoever I want.'-Whiteroom- wrote:
I think hes trying to say that because it is on his computer, he owns it. Kinda like claiming that if you steal something, then manage to put it in your house, you own it... or maybe he thinks you can rent a tv from one of those rental agencies, but as soon as its in his house , its his, regardless of whether the rental term is up.
Last edited by PrivateVendetta (2012-01-06 10:25:50)
if i download a free trial of photoshop, that free trial is mine. its on MY computer whlch is executing the commands that photoshop tells it to. i feel that i'm allowed to modify the program to run as a full version because i'm only altering the bytes of a program that were on my computer. i feel that i can do whatever i want with those bytes. i can change them, delete them, etc.Jaekus wrote:
No shit, Sherlock. The topic is about piracy, not the copy you legitimately bought.HaiBai wrote:
i own my computer and everything on it. as long as im not redistributing/reselling the work of other people, i'm fineJay wrote:
No, you agree to the EULA. You own nothing. You're a renter.
im pretty sure that modifying a free trial to work as a full version counts as piracy. this is what happens when you attempt to respond to a week old post without an understanding of any of the previous discussion
no, because downloading a free trial of a program is completely legal. once i download the trial, i believe it's mine. i'm not talking about software in which you have to steal, such as breaking into a companies server and stealing the program.-Whiteroom- wrote:
I think hes trying to say that because it is on his computer, he owns it. Kinda like claiming that if you steal something, then manage to put it in your house, you own it... or maybe he thinks you can rent a tv from one of those rental agencies, but as soon as its in his house , its his, regardless of whether the rental term is up.
no, because redistributing somebody's software without their permission is something i believe is completely immoral. i never redistribute anything that i crackPrivateVendetta wrote:
I think it's more along the lines of, 'I bought it, I own it, I can give it to whoever I want.'-Whiteroom- wrote:
I think hes trying to say that because it is on his computer, he owns it. Kinda like claiming that if you steal something, then manage to put it in your house, you own it... or maybe he thinks you can rent a tv from one of those rental agencies, but as soon as its in his house , its his, regardless of whether the rental term is up.
You're pretty much wrong.HaiBai wrote:
no, because downloading a free trial of a program is completely legal. once i download the trial, i believe it's mine. i'm not talking about software in which you have to steal, such as breaking into a companies server and stealing the program.-Whiteroom- wrote:
I think hes trying to say that because it is on his computer, he owns it. Kinda like claiming that if you steal something, then manage to put it in your house, you own it... or maybe he thinks you can rent a tv from one of those rental agencies, but as soon as its in his house , its his, regardless of whether the rental term is up.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
i don't really care. this opinion is coming from somebody who doesn't know anything about programming or computers. most programmers i know wouldn't give a shit if someone spent the time just to crack their software, as long as they didn't redistribute it. if somebody has a ton of time to crack my software, and they feel that spending the time to crack my software is worth it, good for them. they beat my protection, as a reward they can have the ability to use my software. the thing that programmers get pissed about is when their software gets redistributed for everybody to useJay wrote:
You're pretty much wrong.HaiBai wrote:
no, because downloading a free trial of a program is completely legal. once i download the trial, i believe it's mine. i'm not talking about software in which you have to steal, such as breaking into a companies server and stealing the program.-Whiteroom- wrote:
I think hes trying to say that because it is on his computer, he owns it. Kinda like claiming that if you steal something, then manage to put it in your house, you own it... or maybe he thinks you can rent a tv from one of those rental agencies, but as soon as its in his house , its his, regardless of whether the rental term is up.
Jay wrote:
You're pretty much wrong.HaiBai wrote:
no, because downloading a free trial of a program is completely legal. once i download the trial, i believe it's mine. i'm not talking about software in which you have to steal, such as breaking into a companies server and stealing the program.-Whiteroom- wrote:
I think hes trying to say that because it is on his computer, he owns it. Kinda like claiming that if you steal something, then manage to put it in your house, you own it... or maybe he thinks you can rent a tv from one of those rental agencies, but as soon as its in his house , its his, regardless of whether the rental term is up.
What is your Spaghetti Policy Here?
What A Long Strange Trip It's Been
What A Long Strange Trip It's Been
what if i downloaded a virus and i disassembled it, detoured it, and made the virus shut itself off. is that also wrong?
No, because the virus was malicious.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
You're a funny kid. You think abortion and same sex marriage is wrong but you have no problem with theft
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
that doesn't change anything. a program is a program. if i'm not allowed to change how the program operates in photoshop, i also shouldn't be allowed to change how a virus operates. it's all the same to the computerJay wrote:
No, because the virus was malicious.
\_/Jay wrote:
You're a funny kid. You think abortion and same sex marriage is wrong but you have no problem with theft
Jay wrote:
No, because the virus was malicious.
What is your Spaghetti Policy Here?
What A Long Strange Trip It's Been
What A Long Strange Trip It's Been
i'm gonna go with the two old men's opinions
Yeah, but even with freeware, I'm pretty sure that you still have to agree to the EULA for that particular software (there are exceptions, but for a lot of free software I've downloaded, I still had to agree to something before installing it). It may not matter to some people that are developing, but it matter's to whoever has taken the time to include the EULA in the software package.
Now, you can go ahead and create some software and distribute it and inform people that they can do what they want with it. Just because other people (or companies) want to protect all the work they did and their IP, doesn't mean you have the right to get that work for free. Because, let's be honest, what you're really paying for is the work that they did writing the program, testing the program, distributing the program, as well as supporting the program (hopefully, if it's a good company). And with the work they did (and all the money they spent), they obviously don't want you doing what you want with it, so it's Licensed to you. By installing the program, you then agree to that License, whatever it may entail.
You're not buying the program, you're buying a License to use the program.
Now, you can go ahead and create some software and distribute it and inform people that they can do what they want with it. Just because other people (or companies) want to protect all the work they did and their IP, doesn't mean you have the right to get that work for free. Because, let's be honest, what you're really paying for is the work that they did writing the program, testing the program, distributing the program, as well as supporting the program (hopefully, if it's a good company). And with the work they did (and all the money they spent), they obviously don't want you doing what you want with it, so it's Licensed to you. By installing the program, you then agree to that License, whatever it may entail.
You're not buying the program, you're buying a License to use the program.
Remember Me As A Time Of Day
You're basically wrong.HaiBai wrote:
if i download a free trial of photoshop, that free trial is mine. its on MY computer whlch is executing the commands that photoshop tells it to. i feel that i'm allowed to modify the program to run as a full version because i'm only altering the bytes of a program that were on my computer. i feel that i can do whatever i want with those bytes. i can change them, delete them, etc.Jaekus wrote:
No shit, Sherlock. The topic is about piracy, not the copy you legitimately bought.HaiBai wrote:
i own my computer and everything on it. as long as im not redistributing/reselling the work of other people, i'm fine
im pretty sure that modifying a free trial to work as a full version counts as piracy. this is what happens when you attempt to respond to a week old post without an understanding of any of the previous discussion
everything you said is correct. does that change my morals about how i feel about cracking software for myself? nope.heggs wrote:
Yeah, but even with freeware, I'm pretty sure that you still have to agree to the EULA for that particular software (there are exceptions, but for a lot of free software I've downloaded, I still had to agree to something before installing it). It may not matter to some people that are developing, but it matter's to whoever has taken the time to include the EULA in the software package.
Now, you can go ahead and create some software and distribute it and inform people that they can do what they want with it. Just because other people (or companies) want to protect all the work they did and their IP, doesn't mean you have the right to get that work for free. Because, let's be honest, what you're really paying for is the work that they did writing the program, testing the program, distributing the program, as well as supporting the program (hopefully, if it's a good company). And with the work they did (and all the money they spent), they obviously don't want you doing what you want with it, so it's Licensed to you. By installing the program, you then agree to that License, whatever it may entail.
You're not buying the program, you're buying a License to use the program.
i'll crack software, but i'll never redistribute it. if that makes you mad, too bad. maybe you can call the cops on me
what part of 'i crack a program to obtain the full version, without paying the retail price that the producers of the program feel represents the time + knowledge + effort spent in making the program' is justifiable to you?
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
He's Polish. Might as well be a Pikey.FatherTed wrote:
what part of 'i crack a program to obtain the full version, without paying the retail price that the producers of the program feel represents the time + knowledge + effort spent in making the program' is justifiable to you?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat