File-Sharing Doesn’t Equal to StealingAdded: Sunday, April 8th, 2012
Category: Bit Torrent Freedom > The Right To Share
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, 2010, www.extrattorrent.com
Op-ed law professor Stuart Green was talking in the press about unauthorized file-sharing and why it couldn’t be considered an act of theft as the international corporations believed.
Since infamous Napster emerged in 1999, file-sharing started growing in popularity directly proportional with the evolution of technology, in our case – P2P. After this, the creative industry had to invest outstanding amounts of money in order to persuade people into thinking that unauthorized downloading is theft. In other words, they equal content theft to stealing. But not everyone can agree with this opinion. For example, Rutgers’ law professor and expert on theft laws shares another point of view. He says that if a file-sharer illegally downloads someone’s track from the web, in most cases, the creator hasn’t lost anything.
Of course, you might try to argue that those who use intellectual property without paying money for it do steal the money that they would have owed if they bought it legally. However, two basic problems can be seen with this contention. First of all, nobody ordinarily can know whether the downloader would have paid the price if he didn’t misappropriate the property. So the argument assumes the conclusion that has long been argued for – that it’s real theft.
Meanwhile, the entertainment industry in cooperation with the CCI (Center for Copyright Information) continues arguing that piracy is damaging the economy of the United States with up to $58 billion annually. As a result, online “theft” costs the US about 373,000 lost jobs. Actually, this particular kind of thinking gave birth to such legislation as Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). Hopefully, everyone who has the least bit of common sense makes all they can to not let this two proposed bills pass. Indeed, this far, SOPA could be considered dead and buried, while ACTA is still waiting to pass the European Court of Justice.
Stuart Green suggested to use words like “unauthorized use”, “trespass”, “conversion”, or “misappropriation” instead of “stealing” and “theft”, because they describe the situation more precisely. Most industry experts agree with him, pointing out that piracy is not stealing, but only copying.
April 8th,2012Posted by:
Sunday, April 8th, 2012
|posted by (2012-04-08 13:58:43)|
|YUP THATS TRUE PIRACY MEANS JUST SHARING AND SHARING IS CARING.GOOD TOPIC.|
|Isn't "Sharing" also "Biblical" and something we are all taught to do from birth?|
|posted by (2012-04-08 14:28:54)|
|yea i was allways taught when growing up that sharing was good, so now these big top idiots are saying ive been taught and every other kid on the planet that sharing is not good........next there be saying the world is flat and we will have to believe them again..lol|
|How can the entertainment industry says they are loosing money due to PIRACY, if their own statistics are correct, they are making billions every year. i think they declared AVATAR as an all timer money maker. if piracy was hitting bad to entertainment industry then how come "AVATAR" happened????|
|They don't lose that much from piracy. Most people who download things can't afford paying full price. Maybe if prices for movies and games were reasonable in this economy people wouldn't pirate and file share.|
|So if a neighbor shares his brand new Blu Ray movie with me is that stealing from the movie industry?|
|Even if they eliminated the ability to file share things like movies, what will stop someone from renting a movie and using PC software to make a copy of it without even logging into the internet?|
|I remember growing up I was able to put a cassette tape into my stereo and record any song played. I was also able to put 2 tapes into my dual cassette recorder and record any make copies of everything I owned and nobody had a problem with that. I remember when I was able to put a tape into my VCR and record any movie from television or from any rental store. Nobody had a problem with that either. Why is it that now that it's digital everyone seems to think it's thievery to steal when while it was all analog nobody had a problem? People need to open their eyes and look at things like this or else it's gonna be super big brother everywhere.....|
|posted by (2012-04-08 19:30:22)|
|This Anti-Piracy thing is getting way out of hand in my opinion.|
Yeah it isnt stealing any idiot could tell you that just by knowing that its called File-SHARING -_-
#8 mystic is right back when its was analog no one cared in the slightest. They actualy built cassette players, VCRs ect so that you could make copies of anything you wanted .
#5 wallywonks im one of those people who cant afford to pay £10-£30 for a single movie, £10-£15 for a music album or £20-£50 for a console game its just way to much I know a few people though who download and if they like it they wait till the price drops and go out and buy it.
|exactly the point in this article, finally someone sees it for the way it truely is|
|posted by (2012-04-08 20:32:02)|
|I remember P2P when it took 3 months to get Southpark the movie back in 99 on Share-Eze on a 56k v90 modem lol eventually finished downloading and my graphics card couldnt handle the file, good times. PSP is definitely not stealing, thanks for the read|
|@wallywonks: According to them, yes, it is stealing, and if they get their way, will monitor all electronic forms of communications and interactions, to eventually piece together (using software of course) what you're doing in your life and then charge you with whatever.|
@Tando: Exactly. Or they will go to the library & borrow it, or borrow from a friend.
|posted by (2012-04-09 09:39:52)|
|lol ppl who belive downloading /pirat aint stealing neeed there head check out ofc its stealing no matter how you look at it|
|posted by (2012-04-09 11:24:40)|
|@taker I do not need my "head check out" and you sound like a real goody two shoe`s.|
My argument is, if you buy something how can it be that you don`t actually own it, and
you are not allowed to share what you have purchased. If I buy something with my hard
earned cash, it`s mine and nobody else`s but I will share it cos my mum always told
me it is rude not to share and don`t let anybody tell you different.
Ok, you want to know anyway you look at it.
Definition of stealing - TAKE another person's property without permission or legal right ( you haven't techinically taken it, you COPIED it,the owner still has it, as diagram above shows for the naive and non reading folk )
Definition of Theft - The action or crime of stealing.
The article clearly states that piracy is piracy and stealing is something different. And written by a very qualified person on the subject. Yes, they are similar, but THEY ARE DIFFERENT and recognised that way in a court of law.
Most people make educated opinions and have valuable contributions. You have been given a plethra of both, and ignored it all.
Everyone's entitled to opinions, I've always found constructive ones to be the best, yours is far from that!
Peace all, thanks for sharing article Sam, you certainly are well read on all this.
|Current law in Australia on theft ( general )|
Crimes Act - Sect 72
A person steals if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.
None of which apply to file sharing.
Just thought I'd share.
Your turn @14 taker, please enlighten me if I am misreading anything
|posted by (2012-04-09 15:58:00)|
|taken some one/some person idententy can also be seen as borrowing even tho thats stealing anything in the world can be seen as borrow ect not stealing its all about the way you look at it. stealing is stealing that soemthing you take with out the right or pay for. thats why its not the same + never will be. yes im downloading meself even tho i know its wrong. reason im doing is the f up laws here about tv shows ect + alot of stuff i cant even see here do to the tv centrals ect so there is alot of reason why i do it like they said on soem movies at start you would not steal a car.|
im all in for sharing is caring all the way. but ppl should also know its not legal ppl should never forget that stealing is stealing no matter how you look at it or what nice fancy 2012 word there is for it.
the paying for a cd dvd blueray ect you got a point there but its the same with everything buy a car you pay to drive it on the road soem city even charce you for driving into the city ect.
sharing is caring yes but stealing is stealing end of storie.
problem layes that artist mpaa riss ect soney disney ect hold the key to stop all this. lower the cost cut of the middle man lower the artis ect price for a movie ect. + ofc tax + let every contry have the right to see the same show + be able to see the same movie ssoem contry have to wait up 2 a few month if not longer
|thanks for the topic|
|posted by (2012-04-09 19:50:25)|
not the end of the story ...
before the existence of internet
people (friends, neighbors) shared videos, music, books ... Why?
today is global on network (people who do not know each other) Why?
sharing is not stealing
It s not true that the entertainment industries lose money to piracy
the industry is growing...
Entertainment spending as a function of income went up by 15% from 2000 to 2008
Employment in the entertainment sector grew by 20% -- with indie artists seeing 43% growth.
The overall entertainment industry grew 66% from 1998 to 2010.
The amount of content being produced in music, movies, books and video games is growing at an incredible pace
Piracy's Not Killing Microsoft
they could do something
but they do not want...
Why do people share?
because they try to keep the system in balance
is a natural law
|posted by (2012-04-09 20:22:09)|
|where not digital liek it is now if want the info first recorde piracy date back 2 like 1756 .|
books aitn the same as mp3 dvd ect. buy you own it.dvd mp3 its digital ect.
ofc they dont lose thaty want ppl to think they lose money last year UK never sold as manny mp3 cd ect.
the problem is artist demant way/get way to much for there contract ect.
acta will be the problem
but no matter what how you put it 1980 arent 2012 digital vs mono books vs e books ect will never ever be the same downlaoding = stealing. i download yes but i explain reason why y its greeed in one of thsoe reasons 2
we neeed to remember 1980 no internet no mp3 dvd ect not a digital world liek it is now
|posted by (2012-04-09 22:01:29)|
|here`s some history for you.|
The practice of labelling the infringement of exclusive rights in creative works as "piracy" predates statutory copyright law. Prior to the Statute of Anne 1709, the Stationers' Company of London in 1557 received a Royal Charter giving the company a monopoly on publication and tasking it with enforcing the charter. Those who violated the charter were labelled pirates as early as 1603. The term "piracy" has been used to refer to the unauthorized manufacturing and selling of works in copyright. Article 12 of the 1886 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works uses the term "piracy" in relation to copyright infringement, stating "Pirated works may be seized on importation into those countries of the Union where the original work enjoys legal protection." Article 61 of the 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) requires criminal procedures and penalties in cases of "wilful trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale." Piracy traditionally refers to acts intentionally committed for financial gain, though more recently, copyright holders have described online copyright infringement, particularly in relation to peer-to-peer file sharing networks, as "piracy."
|posted by (2012-04-09 22:02:59)|
|@taker will this do to keep you quiet.|
Copyright infringement is often associated with the terms piracy and theft. Although piracy connotes brazen high-seas robbery and kidnapping, it has a long history of use as a synonym for certain acts which were later codified as types of copyright infringement. Theft is more strongly hyperbolic, emphasizing or exaggerating the perceived harm of infringement to copyright holders who choose to utilize their copyrights for profit; it connotes a kind of loss which infringement may not actually effect, and the U.S. Supreme Court has even ruled that infringement does not "easily" equate with theft.
Copyright holders frequently refer to copyright infringement as theft. In copyright law, infringement does not refer to theft of physical objects, but an instance where a person exercises one of the exclusive rights of the copyright holder without authorization. Courts have distinguished between copyright infringement and theft, holding, for instance, in the United States Supreme Court case Dowling v. United States (1985) that bootleg phonorecords did not constitute stolen property and that "interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The Copyright Act even employs a separate term of art to define one who misappropriates a copyright... 'an infringer of the copyright.'" In the case of copyright infringement the province guaranteed to the copyright holder by copyright law is invaded, i.e. exclusive rights, but no control, physical or otherwise, is taken over the copyright, nor is the copyright holder wholly deprived of using the copyrighted work or exercising the exclusive rights held.
|posted by (2012-04-09 23:28:08)|
|I want to clarify one thing|
in a robbery there's a person who always lose things
not proven that File Sharing has negative impact on corporate profits
in contrast only benefits
share + social networks + globalization = advertising - benefits
people who never bought books, dvd, music, software
probably still not buying... maybe change their views
I have files on my hard drive
but also original DVDs and Blurays
people share because it's a free
but at the same time moves the mechanisms of consumption
and are often vulnerable consumers
everything is globalized and recognized with shared files
|posted by (2012-04-10 01:22:59)|
|I download movies & music, if I really like a movie I then go and buy it, however music I don't because I think its a rip off as sometimes you pay the same amount you'd pay for a movie and on average you only get about 10 songs on an album that the playing time is 50-70 minutes, also I dont see how it can be theft, I see it this way if you go out and buy something other than movies or music and you loan or share it with someone else that isnt theft, so why should movies, music, software be any different, I find it stupid that if you buy a movie and share it your pirating but if you no longer want the movie you can sell or give it away, to me thats still sharing only difference is you no longer have it also now a lot of blurays and dvds come with a digital copy that you can put on your pc and belongs to you so you should be able to do as you like with it.|
microsoft are just as bad as the movie & music industries, if you buy their new x box 720 when it comes out and you buy a game to play on it you can not play that game on any other x box 720 and you can not sell that game as they plan to code the games so you cant pass or sell them on, what next??
|@ WombatWally: Well-written and well-said comment, so I both applaud and thank you for the thoughtful and intelligent (and correct) points you offer(ed).|
@ taker: I began reading your initial comments but then stopped because of your (with all due respect) awful and really quite terrible spelling, grammar and lack of flow to your postings. Your comments are difficult at best to read, and very frustrating to the point that it takes away from the subject of your writings, at least for/to me as I will stop reading something if the constant errors distract me from the flow of what is being written. Just so you know.
Having said that, the only reason that file-sharing in general, and the sharing of copies of files (including, but not limited to; music, videos and pictures) is only regarded as "stealing" or "pirating" as a result of aggressive campaigns and lobbying by various corporations (and by extension, governments....one-in-the-same, really) to make it so.
Before Metallica and RIAA and such began their attack on average citizen Internet users, there was no correlation between file-sharing and "stealing", aside from perhaps espionage situations, and even then I question the stolen label, although secretive ideas being copied is an area that is mired in the expansive gray-area of legalities.
Even then, governments dictate what is considered "theft", and then enact laws to enshrine that belief, and so the vicious cycle begins/perpetuates.
Are you able to see this? If not, are you really that dense, or are you deliberately trying to be obtuse?
|posted by (2012-04-10 06:54:47)|
|Just to throw my own opinion and thoughts into this mixture of randomness and what seems like bashing, I want to say the following:|
1. Sharing is not NECESSARILY stealing, as someone is normally giving you explicit permission to have a copy of said property, however the owner(s) of the COPYRIGHTED materials never actually shared it to anyone not having paid for the material though a means where the copyright owner(s) profit from the transaction, thus not giving ANYONE the right to make a copy of the material. Someone obtained a copy of said materials through illegal measures, or made an unauthorized copy of the material, thus potentially depriving the copyright owner(s) of an undisclosed amount of money. When something such as a DVD, Bluray, or CD are purchased at a retailer or from the copyright owner, that person - and ONLY that person - are now authorized to have a copy of the material at the price they have just paid. The price they paid is for that individual copy and does not give anyone the right to produce additional copies from that material since there are no royalties being provided to the copyright owners for the additional copies. So, having said all of that, sharing - in the case of copyrighted materials - IS stealing. Plain and simple; black and white.
2. As far as things go from back in the analog days, when audio-cassettes were still being widely used, recording copyrighted music on that media was still stealing as well. The difference is that back then, nobody had a means of finding people infringing on copyright laws such as tracing an IP address to an ISP and then to a subscriber, or determining the owner of a media sharing service (because media sharing services didn't exist in forms as they do today).
3. I thought it was odd, but not atypical - as most of the articles posted on here are missing information or are poorly written in other manners - that after the line ''However, two basic problems can be seen with this contention.'' there is only one of the ''two'' basic problems listed. The other is apparently of no concern... or is more likely the victim of poor writing.
|posted by (2012-04-10 07:21:34)|
(2012-04-09 22:02:59) Delete comment
nobs68 avatar @taker will this do to keep you quiet.
no it wont nr 25 not that i care.
stealing is stealing no matter how you look at it. is the law ect f up yes thats a other storie there is more to it then just downloading. at the end of the day none loses that much anyway but its importen to support the artist ect yes but with the prices ect stealing will always be here
nr 26 = /additional copies. So, having said all of that, sharing - in the case of copyrighted materials - IS stealing. Plain and simple; black and white./
idd it is its simple black and white ect
|@14Taker, Thanks for reposting and having a belief in what is right and wrong. Opinions vary and everyone's entitled to their own. Side note to your alleged stealing of a person's identity is called "Fraud". Using the identity to steal things is another matter.|
@OpenMinder. Thanks for comments.
To all others, really informative discussion and strong beliefs throughout.
I believe, that most are missing of the point of the article, which is what this forum/postings is all about.
I don't believe anyone hear really denies that all this downloading and sharing is not a crime. It is that the article is describing a different terminology for it as most law courts across the globe all agree on the issue.
Article quote - "Stuart Green suggested to use words like “unauthorized use”, “trespass”, “conversion”, or “misappropriation” instead of “stealing” and “theft”, because they describe the situation more precisely. Most industry experts agree with him, pointing out that piracy is not stealing, but only copying."
In Australia it is not against the law to file share unless doing so for financial gain.
While the law is on my side, I will continue to share.
Thanks all for posting
|posted by (2012-04-10 10:56:41)|
|Let us put aside stealing/thieving/fraud etc,|
Point is its a crime[Crime is the breach of rules or laws for which some governing authority (via mechanisms such as legal systems) can ultimately prescribe a conviction], bcoz we are flouting copyright acts due to our "Sharing".
I have never ever bought a single DVD/BLUray or watched the movie in movie halls which i have downloaded , n i believe im not the only one here. If i didnt have this option i may have not watched all, but some of the good movies. So that does amount to loss for the movie makers.It doesnt matter whether we share for financial gains or not.
And its a different thing if u share a movie dvd with you mother/brother/close friend/neighbour, than sharing it on a large scale with ppl you never knew thru torrents or whatever means.
But Im gonna do it no matter whats its called at the end of the day, so are all of you
|I agree 100% Kuntu.|
I had a fair typo on my last post, my bad!
I meant to say, most here would believe it is a crime, including me. I come from a very legal background and I've always played on words and loopholes, maybe too anal at times.
I was merely commenting on the article
|posted by (2012-04-10 18:19:20)|
Its interesting that you say that a crime is a crime regardless, how do you overcome the differences in laws through out the world, some countries have no copyright laws at all .. there are 3 I can name who have no copyright laws even for their own artists - Eritrea, Turkmenistan and San Marino others only have copyright laws that pertain to items within their own country. Of course there is the international copyright laws, but not all countries are "signed" up to it. So my question is if I am in one of these countries and I copy a movie etc exactly how am I stealing if there is no copyright law in force in the country I am in.
If you actually take the letter of the law then even sharing a file. movie etc with you family/neighbour is breaking the law ( you could also be prosecuted for allowing friends to watch a movie with you as you don't have an entertainment licence) .. but that is going to the extreme. Copying has gone on since caveman days, its what humans do, even as children we copy others around us.
The point I am making is that it is only breaking the law if there happens to be a law to be broken where you live.
|So if i am in my friends car and he is listening to a new music album and i listen to it ...did i just listen to this music CD without paying for it!? ..and how is that any different?|
|posted by (2012-04-10 19:58:18)|
|wombat your welcome its always nice to see soem can agree to disagree think ill go cheat on my wife sicne its not cheating atleast if follow soem ppl its borrow or ect lol watch movies i nthe bio cost like the price for oen week fooood no wonder ppl arrent going to damm exspansive|
|posted by (2012-04-10 22:21:49)|
|I think perhaps that Green is basing a significant portion of his arguments on the premise of the historic betamax decision ( The essential difference with ip legislation today is that (never mind sony and universal now being on the same side) the onus appears to be on the consumer rather than the producers of the underlying technology who (vis the aforementioned case) are not the likes of Dotcom, but rather the hardware manufacturers... by extension the outcome of this decision effectively denies the concept that sharing between end users OR retrieval of enduring data (i.e. renting a film and burning it for repetitive watching) has grounds for legislation... anyone else think that the last decades' legal ramblings are ignoring precedent? (a time honoured tradition for us americans.... lol)|
|posted by (2012-04-11 03:02:41)|
|@32 (Zettabyte): Before I answer your question - as pointless as it's going to be to do so - I want to say that I think that you've taken the title of "person who asked the dumbest and/or most off-topic question" from whoever had it last by what you asked.|
First of your questions: Of course listening to a song playing from a CD that your friend has playing in his/her car isn't illegal - assuming that your friend has purchased said copy of the CD from an authorized retailer or the copyright owner(s).
Second of your questions: It's different because listening to a song is not making a copy of the material. Your friend has been authorized to play the song you are listening to and can invite anyone he/she would like to, to listen to the song. However, NOBODY - your friend or anyone listening to the song - are authorized or within any legal right to reproduce said song (or CD) without supplying an authorized retailer or the copyright owner(s) with additional funds adequately compensating the retailing party accordingly.
|posted by (2012-04-11 06:18:32)|
I commented with respect to file sharing, not about the general world as such and what happens out there. And its true that we start copying as kids, but there is more to it than you see, for ex: Usain Bolt cannot copyright running fast becoz its a feature common to Human Species not to him, but whereas everyone cant invent telephone now can they? So society put forth "Copyright Laws" to make sure ppl's hard work is protected.
And its not about talent/property/hardwork but its more about infringing $$$ around which the society revolves now a days.
But as i said its a very vast topic so im not gonna go into it but with respect to file sharing,
I dont think many of the movies/dvds are released in the countries you mentioned, so if you still are watching them there would mean you are smuggling, which is again a crime.
And it doesnt matter if ur country doesnt have a copyright act, but there are other international treaties made by UN/NATO which safeguard intellectual property etc.
So authorities use the law in a similar way as we try to share when sites are blocked or censored, or jump home when you were grounded! lol thats us, human/ppl/society whatever u call.
And as for screening without an entertainment license, there are certain condition's, and trust me watching a dvd with a family/friends doesnt come under copyright infringement. There is a minimum requirement for that.
@zettabyte asked a fair question, and reply is simple,
you can listen to it with ur friends but if ur a Dj and use it for commercial gains then ur going against law, OR if you make a copy of the CD, then u against law, OR if u play the song in a commercial establishment like restaurants/saloons etc then its against law. And this is as per laws on my land, dont know about you.
My presence here itself proves which side Im on, but I will still share all the sides,
otherwise what would be difference between us and those ANTI PIRACY GROUPS.
|Well said everyone, particularly Kuntu|
Now, let's get on with sharing.
Preach what you leech and SEED 'til you BLEED!
|posted by (2012-04-11 11:13:27)|
|wow! a lot of talk and only some things said! OK here is A point P2P is all about small kb of information! not the hole! you do not get the movie, mp3,book or what ever from one person but from many! that is the simple way of putting it! and there for you are not stealing it! you are only getting small kb of information!!!!!!!!!!!! so you are not stealing!!!! you are sharing kb of information! when you are done with the ks of information you do what you want to do with it! so people it is only ks!!!!!!!!!!!!!! not some other BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!!|
|posted by (2012-04-11 11:19:18)|
|oh sorry that last one should of been kb! (The kilobyte (symbol: kB) is a multiple of the unit byte for digital information. Although the prefix kilo- means 1000, the term kilobyte and symbol kB or KB have historically been used to refer to either 1024 (210) bytes or 1000 (103) bytes, dependent upon context, in the fields of computer science and information technology.) what said have A good one!|
|posted by (2012-04-11 11:26:37)|
|OK one finale note! ( peer-to-peer definition|
1. The kind of communication found in a system using layered protocols. Each software or hardware component can be considered to communicate only with its peer in the same layer via the connection provided by the lower layers.
2. A decentralised file sharing system like BitTorrent, Gnutella or Kazaa where computers that download data also store that data and serve it to other downloaders. This increases the total bandwidth available in proportion to the number of users and so reduces download time. It also improves resilience by providing multiple redundant sources for the same data. This contrasts with client-server where all clients download the data from a single server (or mirror), sharing its fixed bandwidth.
Peer-to-peer networks are typically ad-hoc and rely on users sharing the content they have downloaded for the benefit of other users. Users who fail to do this are called "leaches". A "seed" is a node on a peer-to-peer network that is sharing a complete copy of a file, as opposed to other nodes that may only have some of the parts into which the file has been split.
(2010-02-20) ) that is from the World English Dictionary!
|piracy isnt sealing if a person uploads a CAM film hes paid for his movie ticket,cam and internet to upload it and we pay to download it so what are we stealing.stealing is where u take it and dont give it back not copy it or upload it if theyve already paid for what there uploading and we pay our internet for downloading wheres the stealing soon telling your mate a film is crap will probably be piracy|
|posted by (2012-04-11 17:53:49)|
|Hi all, a little hint for those challenged by the English language! (Aren’t we all sometimes?) Write you comments in ‘word’, get the spelling and grammar right, then copy and paste here! Easy. (I did it with this and had a few mistakes).|
|posted by (2012-04-11 23:18:56)|
|@ taker: you sound like you work for the recording industry. witch I know some of the users up here are but that's not the point....the point is you are an Idiot. you need to go back to school (a real one) and re-learn the 3 R's. then I think you need to go and take some advance courses and learn further.|
piracy may be wrong but downloading? the 2 are NOT one in the same!
here is y: pi·ra·cy = 1. robbery, stealing, theft, hijacking, infringement, buccaneering, rapine. 2. illegal copying, bootlegging, plagiarism, copyright infringement. the user that has already made the 1st copy is breaking the law NOT the down loaders! *I can see how downloading can be looked @ as piracy as it does make another copy but its a copy of the copy that has already been made not from the original!*
stealing = to take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it. downloading anything! is NOT stealing as it is freely posted on a site for the taking. I did not beat the recording industry up nor did I sneak in or out of there ware house to get anything directly from them! so I did NOT! steal from THEM!
yes I have committed a crime of piracy BUT because I have deleted (got rid of) the prof, it can't be proven, and I paid for the original!
they claim 58bil a year? LoL that has already been proven wrong! the recording industry is a bunch of LAIRS! and they are just GREEDY! they are starting to sound just like the oil corp's claiming profit loss because of there own greed and stupidity.
because I have downloaded other things don't mean I have stolen them! the recording industry breaks the law all the time and they get away with it!! rape scenes are found in movies and they are NOT soposta be putting that in to movies! that's a Federal crime that they never have to pay for! O NM they do, because they just pay some law official off so they look the other way!
|posted by (2012-04-12 06:20:48)|
|one thing I forgot to mention is that I copied (o no I pirated ) and pasted the definition of pi-ra-cy from a site that had updated info of the definition.|
Websters dictionary still shows the REAL definition of Piracy:
so Piracy is stealing but only IF a its used in a manner then what it was meant to be used for......as dvd's, music cd's and bluray movies, games and so on and so forth. well need I remind the recording industry that HOME video and games and music that was bought in the stores, is made for privet for HOME use only, as defined by the MPAA. so since all this file sharing is done in the home it does NOT bear any missuses and there for is NOT a crime!
so some one needs to remove the picture on the top as it has nothing to do with file sharing LoL.
Using "word" is a good tip, however "word" is an American program and spell checks with Americanisms, not the correct English language, - e,g - colors ( should be colours )
When I write letters I use it, proof read it and change the Americanisms. Most would not know this as that is the way they have been educated. Just another tip for those challenged by the English language.
|It seems this argument is just going to continue going back-and-forth. Yes, I download from P2P and torrent clients. MOST of what I have downloaded are things (like books, TV series, documents, etc. that I CANNOT find anywhere else).|
I would also like to point out that there are some websites that offer FREE book trading and some that offer movie trading with a small fee (less than $2.50).... and what about online libraries and sites like youtube and hulu (both of which are..... you guessed it, FREE!!!)
Most Popular Stories