Oh, but wait.

It doesn’t matter, because copyright laws are woefully outdated, having been drafted long before the dawn of the Internet age, and are so biased towards parasitic middlemen like the RIAA that it lets them get away with robbing both the consumers and the artists blind. In otherwords, copyright law as it exists today is bad.

And bad laws are made to be broken.

So don’t worry if filesharing is illegal, because the only laws you’re violating are ones that richly deserve it.

BTW, I love these losers’ implication that we should obey the law simply because its the law. These are the types of citizens that fascists throughout history have drooled over.

Or we could go down the religous side of things. All ideas spawn from god. so really he owns them. now i dont agree with that part. just an arguement.

Really though you cant own numbers.

I assume that at the same time you’ll be tracking their web-usage,the websites they go to, what they see.

This way you can tell if they’re going to websites that build bombs or not.

You know, you’re on to something. We should wire-tap phones, install security cameras into all buildings and rooms. Maybe even start assigning people specific Jobs, so that they are completely controlled. Then there won’t be any problem at all with people doing things they shouldn’t. We could call this place Libria.

In the old days a false accuser would be put to death, but these days there are no penalties. Here is the problem: these companies are faceless. What we need is the identities of the people behind this to be exposed on the net. I want to know their addresses, phone numbers and where their kids go to school. Only if this information is public would they think twice about their dirty tactics.

I know whenever I write a “script” or do something that I feel proud of it kinda sucks for someone else to take it and call it their own.

The arguement “Influenced” vs “Stolen” is an interesting one, where being influenced by an African tribe to write music instead of having stolen the music. However, the line is very grey. At one hand you could have obvious “influenced” where you write your own song that simply relates to the event, and at the other you have a direct copy of the original song…

But in between you have so many shades of grey. How do you decide if you are breaking a moral code or not? (Sometimes people are immoral, but in general people have these in-built laws that they follow when they recognize others as human beings that have similar feelings).

I honestly don’t know where I stand yet. I’m mostly on the side of mass sharing of information (where everyone benefits from a new chemical I just discovered) instead of privatizing (where I get a lot of money for this new chemical).

Please continue the discussion, some kind of name that you keep throughout the discussion would make it easier though :P

F*ck copyright.

F*ck the RIAA.

They do evil shit, we do evil shit right back, thats how it works. Are you trying to play on peoples morals or something? This website is what makes people feel morally right, since the industry sucks.

Weed is ‘illegal’ and i smoke the hell outa that.

To say that you “own” music is like saying that you “own” software. When you purchase it, you are purchasing the right to use it (or in the case of music, listen to). Certainly anything you create can be considered your own, but when you purchase it, you don’t “own” it in the sense that you can do whatever you want with it. I agree with you, I just wanted to make it shorter :)

My question is.. what evidence did these lawyers have that this couple pirated this game other than the fact that the connection came from their IP address? When students get caught with drugs on a school campus do they go after the school officials? No, they go after the students..

Wyatt
http://whatan00b.com

An idea is a thought. The result of electrical impulses working in the brain. To try and claim electrical impulses as “intellectual property” means you may as well start scanning everyone’s brain so they don’t have the same idea, because then thinking it after it’s already been thought is illegal.

EXACTLY! The question is where to go from here…

so you agree it is ‘piracy’ to share files illegally… This whole argument is born out of misuse of language that has been adapted to fit terms that do not quite fit – especially with classic definitions of the words.

To download a copy of a file IS illegal, its just there is no way to really enforce it.

QUOTE: For electronic and audio-visual media, unauthorized reproduction and distribution is occasionally referred to as piracy (an early reference was made by Daniel Defoe in 1703 when he said of his novel True-born Englishman : “Its being Printed again and again, by Pyrates”.

The whole point is to argue global intellectual copyright REFORM to adjust to today’s standard. That way, the failed copyright enforcers aren’t wrongly prosecuting people.

And you didn’t know the meaning of “forgery” in piracy context ?

I hope you didn’t paid for those classes, if yes you have been fooled… you know less than the average geek here…

Like i said every little argument you say has been discussed of many times on many forum topics with more qualified people than you and me…

Stop arguing for nothing.

There is something to say for bands taking it upon themselves to sell their records online or give away low-res versions if people want. Radiohead, NIN, etc.
The problem is that the music Industry has changed, but the big portion of the industry and lawyers/laws do not want to accept it. There needs to be a fundamental change in the way Musicians and Artists handle their record releases and monetary compensation for them. Our world is connection, music is readily and easily available to whomever wants it. We need to find a way to make this work, but the first step is to realize that the game has changed. Make the artists reap benefits for creating good records, give the consumer a true incentive to NOT download, and maybe they will. The record companies also need to take responsibility and apologize for OVER-CHARGING the consumer with record sales….18-20-22$ for an album of 12 songs. Like I said, you have a dis-heartened consumer base of music-lovers who have forgone the days of spending mass money on albums. Now is the time to reform, and that doesn’t mean charging every IP you find to be seeding on a torrent. You aren’t looking at the real problem, you are just skimming the top and not realizing that the TIMES HAVE CHANGED.

—If as that musician you bought a cd of that african tribe playing music, and then sold it 20 years later as your own then yes. Never once did anyone say that influence = copyright violation. Everyone is influenced by something.

And to that person who said I am not educated, I have a B.S in Music Industry and have taken many classes in Copyright law. Read what I wrote! I agree that file-sharing has had MANY MANY benefits on the record industry and will continue to do so. We can now get our music to an infinite amount of people INSTANTANEOUSLY. But that doesn’t mean it is being done in the right way.

So quick to attack because you feel that you are the little guy. If you read, maybe you’ll understand I am on your side and not against you.

Once again, its completely wrong to say influence = illegal. VIOLATING a COPYRIGHT LAW, no matter how much we dont like it, is STILL ILLEGAL.

Like in music . about every sound, sample, idea has been forwarded to us in public one way or another.

For example …
You ever went to Africa for a holiday. It was a great trip.
20 years later you (as a musician) you come up with a CD influenced by that journey). By your means you will have to pay that African tribe that inspired you.

I say … the world is really getting crazy.

So forgery isn’t illegal by default, only by proxy if used as a means to commit an illegal act.

Seriously i did’nt said it wasn’t illegal, i said there is a word for this and the fact you don’t use it’s a proof you don’t know what you’re tlaking about.

Solutions ? well i bearlly only listen music played in “free parties ” or “raves” taht are free and in most countries illegals themselves…
But the artist in those free parties make almost as good music that the “comercial” artist for me…

BTW:
for·ger·y (fôrj-r, fr-)
n. pl. for·ger·ies

1. The act of forging, especially the illegal production of something counterfeit.

illegal.

You can call it stealing if you want but it only shows that you don’t know at all what you’re talking of.

So please shut up we all here have seen your arguments so many times we’re too tired to answerd those basic trolls.

to take the property of another wrongfully and especially as a habitual or regular practice

The music is property of the Record company or Artist that released it. It is sold for monetary compensation. That is not to be distributed, broadcasted, etc. without violating the copyright. Sharing that is illegal by violating the copyright attached to that property. If you sold a soup that was world famous secret recipe from your Mom, do you feel that everyone has a right to open up shop next to you and give the same soup the same recipe away for free….you would go out of business.

Even if the word isn’t stealing, your are still violating the copyright, and is illegal.

You used the evil word stealing.
It isnt !

Any article coming up about the VS elections and especially their thoughts about P2P, filesharing and what they call “piracy” ?

Otherwise i might give it a try.

There is something to say for bands taking it upon themselves to sell their records online or give away low-res versions if people want. Radiohead, NIN, etc.
The problem is that the music Industry has changed, but the big portion of the industry and lawyers/laws do not want to accept it. There needs to be a fundamental change in the way Musicians and Artists handle their record releases and monetary compensation for them. Our world is connection, music is readily and easily available to whomever wants it. We need to find a way to make this work, but the first step is to realize that the game has changed. Make the artists reap benefits for creating good records, give the consumer a true incentive to NOT download, and maybe they will. The record companies also need to take responsibility and apologize for OVER-CHARGING the consumer with record sales….18-20-22$ for an album of 12 songs. Like I said, you have a dis-heartened consumer base of music-lovers who have forgone the days of spending mass money on albums. Now is the time to reform, and that doesn’t mean charging every IP you find to be seeding on a torrent. You aren’t looking at the real problem, you are just skimming the top and not realizing that the TIMES HAVE CHANGED.

But needless to say, stealing Intellectual property is still stealing property. You haven’t paid for that property. They dont give away concert tickets for free, or shirts for free, or movie tickets for free. But until there is incentive, no one will change, and music will continue to bear the effects of FREE REIGN.

Sharing, including files is a born right moron. Only greedy cocksuckers like you consider it illegal.

It states “While most of these cases are valid…” – How do they actually know this?

It also gives the impression that the couple had a wireless network, but does not state this outright.

The case is reported on the BBC but states that the couple did not have a wireless network. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7697898.stm

When I first read the story on the BBC website this morning I noticed that the logo for The Pirate Bay was actually from http://piratebay.com/ i.e. not the real Pirate Bay at all. The BBC have since corrected this.

Poor journalism all round?

To paraphrase Ivan Drago from Rocky IV….

WE WILL BREAK YOU! :P

OK, so I guess you can’t own anything you create then?

“innocent people are being threatened with ruin in the UK because of you assholes”
you mean, entertainers can’t pretend they are important people anymore? Yes, I agree, but i think that’s a positive thing. True artists will survive, others will hafta get a real job.

You can’t own music.
You can only ‘own’ ability to make/play music.

Sorry, but the freedom to share your own possessions with whomever you choose is indeed a born right. Try again.

“innocent people are being threatened with ruin in the UK because of you assholes.”

Innocent people? Haha, no. Just the Copyright Mafia.

People on these forums can be extreme in their opinions, usually for the worse.

Anyway, good thing this couple won their case. If we keep up articles like this one and continue to see innocent people trump that of greedy corporations perhaps they’ll think twice before assaulting people again with this bullshit. At the very least it’s embarrassing, at the most they stand to lose potentially lots of business from P2P diehards.

Roze
http://www.10ch.org/

RUPERT MURDOCH IS A FILE SHARER OMG!!

there is a lot of legit porn sites out there with good terms of use…

http://doodmovies.com/

read the terms if you want…