OT: Which is better: XP or 2000? > Another Piracy Discussion - Page 11

PvK · #**101** December 3rd, 2003, 05:15 AM

A good side point. USA(sic) musicians can also sign up to get their pile of pennies a month for broadcasts tracked by the organization (I think it does so worldwide), but I didn't want to drag that detail into the "IP violations = theft" discussion, which is already pretty far afield.

I didn't think Fryon could possibly be right about it being illegal to record radio... or TV, or whatever. No doubt the media cartel would love to make it so, though.

There was someone writing about it being supposedly illegal in some of the states in the USA to record TV and then skip the ads by fast-forwarding over them, but I think maybe I was mistaken that it was earlier in this thread.

However, it is just another step along the line Fryon has been towing of copying anything as theft - see the article HERE titled "SKIPPING COMMERCIALS IS STEALING ACCORDING TO TURNER CEO"!

I tend to think we're headed more toward Orwell's 1984.

PvK

Fyron · #**102** December 3rd, 2003, 05:40 AM

No... it is illegal to record off of the radio in the US. TV recording is ok for home use only. But radio is not...

Quote:

However, it is just another step along the line Fryon has been towing of copying anything as theft

Umm... copying things is quite legal, as long as you keep the copies to yourself. I never said that copying musics, movies, etc. was illegal. As long as you have a legal license to own the material, you can make as many copies for personal use as you want. I said that acquiring copies made by someone else for something that you have no legal license to use is theft.

[ December 03, 2003, 03:49: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

JayBdey · #**103** December 3rd, 2003, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
No... everyone does not do it anyways. There are many people that do not do it. Bandwagon arguments are just silly. Everyone smokes, so why don't you? Everyone is jumping off that cliff, so why don't you?

Maybe because jumping of a cliff would hurt a lot?

Um yeah, it is OK because everyone does it because there is strength in numbers. As long as there are millions of us we're safe because they can't get all of us, and wont try for very long.

Copying songs does NOT equal theft by law, it is copyright infringement.

Copyright Infringement DOES NOT EQUAL theft

It is a different crime. This is the legal definition. I don't care what YOU think it is. The legal definition is the only one that counts.

I have a Tivo and skip ads all the time, is this illegal too because the shows are not being compensated because I'm not watching their ad garbage? The way you look at it, anything could be considered stealing if you put the right spin on it.

Fyron · #**104** December 3rd, 2003, 07:46 AM

A lot of people committing morally wrong actions does not make it any less of a wrong thing to do...

Once again, you are conjuring up this whole legal angle to avoid agreeing to the fact that "copyright infringement" is stealing... You are the only person that was ever talking about technical legal issues. Of course they are different crimes. Noone ever said they were not.

Quote:

The legal definition is the only one that counts.

That is quite wrong.

Quote:

I have a Tivo and skip ads all the time, is this illegal too because the shows are not being compensated because I'm not watching their ad garbage? The way you look at it, anything could be considered stealing if you put the right spin on it.

I never said it was illegal... that was PvK. There is nothing wrong with presenting the other side of an issue in a debate. In fact, it is often a very good idea.

The way I look at it, only actions that are stealing can be considered stealing.

[ December 03, 2003, 05:52: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Roanon · #**105** December 3rd, 2003, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
The way I look at it, only actions that are stealing can be considered stealing.

Means: only actions that *you* consider stealing are stealing? Fyron, there *are* other opinions than yours, and they are at least equally right or wrong

Well I'm not the first to think of the words "self-centered" and "stubborn" I guess

[ December 03, 2003, 06:03: Message edited by: Roanon ]

Fyron · #**106** December 3rd, 2003, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Roanon:

quote:
Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
The way I look at it, only actions that are stealing can be considered stealing.

Means: only actions that *you* consider stealing are stealing? Fyron, there *are* other opinions than yours, and they are at least equally right or wrong

Well I'm not the first to think of the words "self-centered" and "stubborn" I guess

Umm... that had absolutely nothing to do with "my opinion". It was a simple statement of the fact that only an action that is stealing is stealing... I fail to see what it could possibly have to do with opinion. Of course, what is stealing could in some convuluted way have to do with opinion, but what I said had no opinion in it at all.

Of course, if people would actually look at the definition of "steal" that I posted, they would see that a lot of these actions do indeed qualify as stealing... nothing to do with any opinion, but with cold hard fact of the language.

"steal" is a much broader term than some people think it is.

Quote:

If the majority of people are commiting morally wrong acts. Perhaps it is not morally wrong anymore.

So if the majority of people start killing their neighbor, does killing your neighbor stop being morally wrong? If a majority start killing off their firstborn child, does that make killing off your firstborn no longer morally wrong? (not talking about abortion here, talking about wacking the little tike some time after birth)

[ December 03, 2003, 14:32: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

tesco samoa · #**107** December 3rd, 2003, 05:52 PM

Mongolian society from the 300's to the 1500's believed in plundering there fallen foe's Taking what they conquered as theirs.

In that society that was what was right.

If we lived in a society where we had to give up our first born to sacifice then that would be right. Those who hid their first born would be wrong. As per that societies laws and customs.

To answer your question. If the majority of people stated to kill their neighbours in your society right now. It would be wrong according to the laws and customs of your society. But if the trend continued within your country I am sure that some of the laws and customs would change to reflect this change in society. So then it would not be morally wrong according to that society. Remeber 50 years ago in your country it was morally wrong for a black person to sit in the front of a bus. It was morally wrong for an Irish person to apply to many jobs in the Toronto area.
But luckly society changed and the laws changed to reflect these changes in society. Which drives the morals of a society. It is based on the laws and customs of that society at that time.

geoschmo · #**108** December 3rd, 2003, 06:18 PM

That's true Tesco. Although I hope to never live in a soceity where such things are acceptable.

This whole issue is one of semantics. Copyright infringment or theft. It may not fit a strict legal definition of theft, but it's still taking what's not yours, and it's still wrong as far as our laws and soceity have determined to this point. Will that change in the future if people continue to ignore it? Perhaps. But that doesn't change the fact that it's illegal now.

There were many brave souls in the 60's that fought against the discriminatory laws and practices of the day. Rosa Parks decided it wasn't right that she had to sit in the back of the bus, so she did something about it. We can applaud her courage now, but she paid a price for her disobedience then. As many others did, and some worse then her.

I guess the question is do you honestly feel that you have a right to copy and share music, software and other IP type stuff? Enough so that you feel it worth taking a stand and suffering the consequences? Do you feel that by taking a stand and freely "sharing" software and music someday you will be considered as a freedom fighter and be admired for your courage? If you do, then do what you feel is right. But be prepared to face the consequences so that future generations can share freely.

Or do you maybe just want to get the stuff without paying for it?

Fyron · #**109** December 3rd, 2003, 08:07 PM

Moral relativism only goes so far...

geoschmo · #**110** December 3rd, 2003, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Moral relativism only goes so far...

I agree with you, but the discussion seems to have come around to a question of what is legal. Legality and morality are two different things. Often they are complimentary, sometimes contradictory, but they are never the same.