Comments on: “Shoot the Pirate” Copyright Campaign Descends Into Real Violence

By: “Shoot the Pirate” Copyright Campaign Descends Into Real Violence | UploadVideos.Org

Thu, 08 Dec 2011 04:32:22 +0000

[...] Source: “Shoot the Pirate” Copyright Campaign Descends Into Real Violence [...]

By: “Disparad al Pirata”, o la campaña publicitaria que desembocó en violencia real – Social Commerce.es | Crear tienda en Facebook Vender por Internet y Vender en Facebook

Thu, 17 Nov 2011 18:00:16 +0000

[...] disturbios callejeros debería comportar algo más de responsabilidad… penal.Vía | Torrentfreak Foto | Tetrabrain“Disparad al Pirata”, o la campaña publicitaria que desembocó en [...]

By: TTFN

TTFN — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 05:14:00 +0000

Agreed, Disqus is terrible. Your attitude is a bit too defeatist but I share your concerns. The social and political implications are disturbing.

I disagree, they hate streaming and mp3. Printing presses, warehouses and shipping trucks = record labels. With regard to how royalties are worked out, double dipping etc is irrelevant. A (paying) consumer has a choice to use said service or not. The free market will find it’s way.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 22:58:00 +0000

Ogra:
If you want to charge people for the time and media for a copied CD, go right ahead. The morality isn’t really a question- it answers itself. Why would you do that when YOU got it for free? Because you’re hypocritical and greedy… just like the studio before you.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:04:00 +0000

nirl.eu/7

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 13:41:00 +0000

phlpn.es/7x9vmd

By: Ogra

Ogra — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 12:26:00 +0000

Airplane and concert tickets represent a permission slip to use limited space. The actual objects have no physical worth. When you make a new one of those, you’re taking someone else’s service. You are placing a burden on someone else by making them accommodate you, not just making something. To put it simply, making the concert or airplane ticket is fine. When you use it though, you place a burden on someone else, and that’s when it becomes harmful. If I’m selling a CD, I’m causing no harm. This same argument applies for money.

So, now it’s immoral to sell counterfeit CDs? You know, I’m pretty sure that the MAFIAA say that my filesharing is immoral too. Your claim of ethics holds as much weight as theirs. The only factor of ethics is “do I directly cause someone else harm?”. Counterfeiting does not do that, so why shouldn’t I be able to?

And here’s a question; why is it OK if I’m giving other people access to someone else’s hard work for free (filesharing), but as soon as I start making money from doing it, it’s wrong. Sounds like people just hate profit.

By: ndmushroom

ndmushroom — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:57:00 +0000

@Ogra: That’s a very dangerous line you’re crossing. Where does your ability to copy (and sell) physical products stop? If you can copy and sell your own (legally acquired) CD, can’t you just as well copy and sell your own (legally acquired) concert ticket? Airplane ticket? And, if you’re a bit more technically proficient, who’s to say you can’t you copy and sell your own (legally acquired) 100 dollar note?
There’s the law, and there’s your own (or your society’s) morality and ethical code. To my own personal morality, making money out of the hard (or not so hard, that’s not the point) work of someone else is wrong.

By: Ven

Ven — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:12:00 +0000

Hey, it’s gonna take a lot to drive me away from you.

By: Ven

Ven — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 05:11:00 +0000

Forgot to post my point (have I mentioned before my distaste for Disqus?).

Pandora (or moving music listeners to streaming music instead of purchasing) is a win for the labels. It gets them more money, and it moves it through the PROs where they can double dip on it.