Is it legal for ISP to shut me down for file sharing?

I think there is an obvious problem here. That is that writing a book, making musics, and writing a program all take time. The question is, do you get paid for you time, or the results of your time?

In capatalism, we get paid based on our results (even if it is an hourly wage). In this way, filesharing is stealing money from the people who provide these ideas. The issue at hand is not about 'stealing ideas' (which I agree should be free), but rewarding someone who has put work into that which you are copying. Yes they are generally over-rewarded, but why should you depend on other people to reward them, and then leech the benefits yourself?

Now I think another good and possibly more relevant question is, why do people steal it? I think it is due to 2 main reasons: convience and expense. One should note the relative success of online individual song purchases. These are relatively cheap, and very convienent.

So I guess I have 3 question for everybody:
What are filesharers stealing?
Why are they?
How should artists/developers be paid?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What are filesharers stealing?

the creativity of other people

Why are they?

because it´s for free

How should artists/developers be paid?

when artist are good enough ,they don´t need to care about file-sharers

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

you want an example ? fine : GRAN TURISMO 4

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

sidenote : i´m a "filesharer" par exellence ( not p2p )
the thing is , i do NO damage !
when i couldn´t get my games and movies for free - i wouldn´t play them or watch them !
you know what i mean ?

ps : don´t get me wrong ,there´s lot of stuff ou there that is worth buying

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I use file sharing to test out music before I buy a CD or to find Mp3s to replace my enormous vinyl collection. I don't have a lot of disposable income, but I might start buying from the iTunes store if it was available in Canada. It still doesn't seem right that an American organization can dictate to a foreign ISP who they can have as a customer.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

because it´s for free
Well, all stealing is 'free'.

when artist are good enough ,they don´t need to care about file-sharers
So you are less likely to steal from a good artist? Good artists have much more to loose from file sharing, as they are more likely to see a larger piece of the profits.

the thing is , i do NO damage !
Yes, you do. You are making it easy for other people to also steal the stuff. People who would buy it if it wasn't so easy to steal.

I completely agree with you here. I see no harm in downloading music to try it out, and most companies supply samples now. Vinyl is one of those issues where you don't even have a choice but to download it.

 

I would never buy what I download anyway, and in case I really like something I will go to the store and buy it. The fuckers shoudn't complain. It is free advertisement.

The game 'operation flashpoint' had an interesting feature. It had free downloads which would degrade illegal copies. Some ingame features would start to fuck up. the company said that they actually started selling MORE games after making these free downloads with the 'degrading' software. The people were hooked on the game and just went out and bought the game. They actually said that they never took any legal action against warez sites and such, because it was free advertisement for the game. They wanted people to download it and extend their customer base.

na ja...is there a lesson to be learned from this? Don't piss off the people, but give them what they want! A taste of good software.

 

Just another point here:

For arguements sake you've built a Classic Car from the Chassis up, now that one Car should be sold for a pretty penny because in all essence it's a one of a kind, you could call it "Unique" and therefore worth far more than most cars on the market.

But people say they want a car just like that, now you've sold the first for an extortionate price but any car's that copy the designs are far cheaper because of mass production.

Personally I believe that if you built the first car you should be paid for the first car, and the first car alone. (The mass manufacturers would offer you a fix sum to cover their use of your plans be they copyrighted or Patented.)

I mention this because musicians aren't getting the money, they have already been paid by the large corporate companies a fixed sum to cover their "reproduction"(Sometimes a fixed royality is paid per year). The company then owns that artists material and goes about protecting it for themselves not the artist.

What annoys me is that these corporate companies have quite a monopoly on producing the music they aquire on CD's that are worth about 75p ($1) to produce but then sell for like 1400%+ higher than the manufacturing cost.

Now imagine this, You place the music files onto the internet and you do a deal with the telecoms companies. Every download is about 650mb's for a CD, you can suggest that most people using broadband will download a CD in about 3hrs or so.

Imagine if the price for download was just above the manufacturing price, don't you think they would still get paid?
Especially since the "manufacturer" doesn't have to purchase CD's to print to, or even the massive machines for production and labeling.

Infact they could continue to make money by selling blank CD's for you to copy the ISO to yourself.

 

Well, all stealing is 'free'.

gratis is not the same as stealing .....



So you are less likely to STEAL from a good artist? Good artists have much more to loose from file sharing, as they are more likely to see a larger piece of the profits.

you calling it stealing doesn´t make it stealing ,allright ?
yep , i´ll always rather buy things from good artists than from bad ones ... wouldn´t that everybody do ?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Yes, you do. You are making it easy for other people to also steal the stuff. People who would buy it if it wasn't so easy to steal.

no , i do not !
only people who have an opinion like me get those things - when they can´t test it for free , chances are almost zero that they´ll buy it ! have you ever thought about the pros of such "stealing" ? no-name games/musicians get a real chance now ,man .....
btw , i´ve wasted so much money for some shitty games i´ve only played for few hours

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

one game was really sassy - driving emotion type-s / ps2 , 60€ --- í´ve played it not even one hour ,then it flew through the room !

I completely agree with you here. I see no harm in downloading music to try it out, and most companies supply samples now. Vinyl is one of those issues where you don't even have a choice but to download it.

no that´s strange - that was exactly my point .....
try-before-you-buy , just a little bit more "try"

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

gratis is not the same as stealing .....
LMAO. All stealing is gratis. It usually has the added meaning of being a 'gift'.

you calling it stealing doesn´t make it stealing ,allright ?
steal-to take without right or permission
You haven't shown where the artist gave permission, or why you should have the right. I have shown why you should NOT have the right in most cases. If people don't buy it, there is no reason for the industry to pay the musician.

yep , i´ll always rather buy things from good artists than from bad ones ... wouldn´t that everybody do ?
Downloading off kazaa isn't buying.

You are making it easy for other people to also steal the stuff.no , i do not !
So you download, and then remove from your program folder so others can't get it off you? That just makes you a leech and a hypocrite. You're allowed to do it, but not them?

have you ever thought about the pros of such "stealing" ?
That is not your choice or mine, but the musicians/industry.

try-before-you-buy , just a little bit more "try"

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

LMAO. Are you honestly telling me that you own all the CDs for the music that is on your computer?

 

Making a copy of a book is not stealing the book, if:

- it is a copy for private use
- it is not distributed

Same thing should apply to music.

Arguments to make stealing acceptable, are all flawed. Theft is theft.


I stole my neighbour's car today. He didn't drive it enough anyway

I stole a baby from the hospital the other day. Wanted to try before buy

 

I'm fairly certain that the copyright on a book forbids this. You can take copies of segments of a book for academic (read as citing excerts in a review article) or for personal use (empathis on excerts). You can't simply photocopy a whole text for private reading and claim it is not an abuse of copyright.

This is the nub of the argument against MP3's.

Even taking a tape copy of an albumn is against copyright.

Many people say they want a baby. None say they want a teenager.

 

Ted: there is absolutely no control on this book copying. "excerpt" is not defined anywhere. It is possible to copy whole books with no trouble.

It's a question of memes

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The idea of copying for private use without distribution needs to develop first. I think my criteria stand.

 

First off, I recommend you remove the offending files. Yes, mostly software is copywrited world wide, with agreements with most other countries to up hold those copywites.

I also recommend you get a program called Peer Guardian to keep out most of those folks that want to see what you have on your computer. You can find the program by doing a search in Google and it is free. Lots of people are getting paid to search the internet to find folks such as yourself that have files that are not legal.

I will not get into the question of theft, only give you the above advice.

 

Just thought I'd stick my nose in.

Thanks to the net control of the means of distribution is back in the hands of the general population. This is not an opinion simply a statement of fact.
If copyright is essential to ensure a healthy music/film/literature 'industry' then could somebody explain how creative work survived before copyright? I'm sure Plato didn't go shouting about his intelectual property rights. What about Chaucer and those there chanting monks. Can anybody here quote 12th century copyright law? Was there any?

If you want to entertain you can still earn a living from live performance. The vast majority of entertainers still earn their crust this way. Always have and always will.
Copyright is just a blip on histories radar.

How much should I pay for this tune I'm whistling?
Dee cee

 

Actually I think Plato quoted "Plagurism is the sincerest form of flattery", although I could be wrong.

If indeed it was he that quoted that, then I can assume that even in Greek times there was plagurism and people would steal quotes from one another.

However plagurism is slightly different, since every word we utter, ever word thats written or eve read, proves that we are all deep down plagurists that have stolen from others. Without a little stealing (mimicking) at the beginning we wouldn't be able to communicate with one another.

I've argued about copyright and the explanation of stealing time and time again, and my input is found throughout this and other posts.

For instance legally a person can make a copy of someones patented product as long as they don't make duplicate copies to sell. Since I would state that a Patent by law is more important than a songwriters lyrics, that will be plagurised by people singing to themselves on their way to work.

I would state that sharing MP3's of a lower than CD quality format will not be breaking a piggy back but make some music more popular and able to reach a larger market reach than some musicians would have dreamed.

Sharing music has increased the word "Popular" with music.

 

3 million people got to read my book?

At least i'd be very famous

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

well..

Well.. i suppose, that if there are people that you know that own the music, then what's the difference if they let you borrow the cd or if you download it? Is borrowing considered stealing?

 

also

also.. mp3 quality is nothing compared to cd quality, so what makes it illegal? It's not the same, therefore its not stealing.. If you take someones idea and modify it, its not stealing it, as long as you understand it (so they can't sue you for intellectual theft).

 

OK.
Then apply THAT to his previous analogy...

What if you spent 2 years of your life writing a book.
The day after you publish it, someone comes along, makes a copy of it, puts it on the internet for anybody who wants it to take a free copy, and it is downloaded 3 million times for free?

You still get nothing, but the person who liberated your free ideas acquired no monetary gain either.

Is that OK?

 

OK, a copy that is not as high in quality as the original... It is all done in Arial font, and the illustrations are slightly pixelized.
Now is it OK?

So, if you buy a book or see a movie and you don't like it, should you be refunded?

See, the problem is that by offering it up for free downlaod to anyone in the world with a computer, there ARE no roayalties paid to the artist.
So the mass distributors are not paying their sum to you to use your plans.

Great point that often goes ignored in these conversations.
"Ideas" are not copyrightable or patentable.
They are free.
The time and effort it takes to take these ideas, develop them and turn them into something people will want is what is being protected.
If I wrote a book about a man who is driven insane by the delusion that he is the Second Coming of Christ...
That would be an idea, and you would be legally entitled to run with that idea and write your own book based on the same premise (though you may get some backlash from negative press and whatnot).
However, if I spend several years taking that idea and developing characters, relationships, complex plot-lines, creative dialogue etc.
That is no longer an idea that should be free for anyone to simply take and distribute freely, it is several years of my life, efforts and hard work that is now being rendered monetarily worthless.

 

So, if you buy a book or see a movie and you don't like it, should you be refunded?


hmmm .... refunded would mean i get my money back if i don´t like what i´ve bought , aye ? ( sorry , low language skills

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

)
no , that´s the wrong step .... i should just be able to "test" something , BEFORE i buy it

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

see , i can´t test my ps2 games in the market , i have to trust the opinion of various ps-mags ....... and in most cases , my opinion differs a lot .......
i think my example was good enough to prove my point !
if you like something you´ve "stolen" - buy it !!!
i tell you , you can be much more objective about a product .....
just take the new tony hawk underground ..... i´m so disappointed , i´m not gonna buy this game - and fortunately , i´ve tested it !
so in fact , i HAD to "steal" it :bugeye: