I am going to answer each of your points
drsquare in a numbered list.
A. No, I am surprised that they outlawed an activity that everybody does. Downloading copyrighted works freely is not illegal if you have permission, like with indie music, freeware software, etc. IT IS WITHOUT PERMISSION that is illegal, and the fact that the decision seemed broad is troubling to me.
You people just refuse to accept that there is such a thing as copyright law...
Generlization. NEXT!
If you're downloading it illegally, you're not a consumer. Consumers pay for things. Consumers have jobs.
Complete bullcrap to boot.
Consumers consume. They either do it legally by paying when having to, or getting it for free when not having to pay. Not all consumers pay for things, and NOT ALL (but some, maybe alot are) is illegal. And no, not all consumers have job. ANOTHER generalization.
Fair use doesn't include downloading it illegally.
I agree, but a question - what about images on websites and saving them to your computer for personal (non-distribution) use?
it's no different from stealing that very product from a store shelf.
Bullshit it is. The differences are fundimental, philosophical, factual, and legally so.
With copying the software we have;
No loss of physical items/software, a somewhat uncertain idea of whether potential revenue can be gained from the copying act, and the easy fact that copyright infrignement was the crime the person is prosecuted for. Stealing the box from a store on the other hand, we have deprived them of the potential to make money from that one copy/box, not to mention taken away something that they don't have abymore, and finally, theft laws have been violated.,/P>
I don't know about you, but those are differences to me.
you're not entitled to their work without fair compensation
Shouldn't this read "you're not entitled to their work without fair compensation if it is requested"? Are we making it wrong unintentionally to download freeware/open source, and independent artist with this statement?
Copyright Infringement" is synonymous with "Theft of Intellectual Property" under bother US and UK law at the very least.
Then why the hell is it that nobody is being prosecuted under this ("Theft of Intellectual Property" ), and so far the only ones I see using it are those from the RISS/BSA/MPAA/Micro$oft?
The ones who call it stealing, like the execs who say that about skipping TV ads, are either really sespirate, don't know what the fuck "stealing" really is, or both.
Well, they don't. Never have. Never will. That's why there are words rational people call obscene and offensive.
I think the real reason we have "offensive" words is because people are oversensitive. In my humble opinion, the context of a word should be what is offended and not the word itself.
http://www.nailmaster.ru/fuck.html
Proper English usage of the Word Fuck for the humor lovers.
The truth is at some price you would have bought it, but the price was higher than that, so you set the price at $0, and took it without the sellers consent. A trade requires an agreement between seller and buyer. You bypassed that agreement, so you stole it.
Bypassing an agreement and COPYING A FILE is not theft no matter how much it is incorporated with irrelivant matter ("Took", "reduced the price to 0$"???) Illegal (copyright infringement is) yes, but you and several others in this thread have been beaten to death on that argument that it is theft.
I will only accept what the pro-DMCA crowd wants me to accept when they start calling a crime what it really is under law instead of using terms that imply forced morals. That means stopping the "stealing music" bullshit when talking about copyright infringement. We get that it's wrong windbags, but calling it something that it isn't made it take longer to figure out.
I don't think anyone can seriously argue that Kazaa does not promote illegal copying.
That is just as stupid as the "having [junk food in the machines] promotes obeisity" excuse spreading around now, which could be used against any food for that matter. It is just like George Carlin's "Big Electron," it just is, just like KaZaa is just software. The people are the ones that control the usage, it doesn't do anything on it's own!
I know things get tiring, but there ARE people after all people, me being one of them, that sometimes never gets tired of whatever jokes and clichés are thrown around here, and that is mainy because they are more tolerable to me than the clichés thrown around by some, like the RIAA/MPAA/BSA and their blind supporters. And where the hell do you get off trying to dictate what is and what isn't "normal"? How do you determine that anyways? What is a "normal" human being?
Stwarman argument, this does not change the fact that not everybody thinks the same way in what is and isn't funny, n'or will it change my opinion that if you don't like something, posting in the smartass way you did won't make things better/change things.
Maybe because they became NOT FUNNY years ago, perhaps?
Hopefully, this trend will continue to the NO-LONGER-FUNNY Korea one-liners as well.
Did you happen to think that what is not funny and funny is a personal preference? YOu are starting to sound like those very annoying-as-hell clique girls from high school.
It's a personal preference, if soembody think's whatever joke for whatever reason is funny, and you don't, why not skip it instead of posting high-ego, high snob bullshit comments?
You mean potentially illegal, and potentially copyright infringing, copyright infringement is that, copyright infringement, illegal copying, not theft.
"Fact it, 90% of BT traffic was copyrighted material that was illegal to distribute.
"? Here we have another flaimbate throwing troll who gets statistics out of the rectal section of the library.
I, however, proudly post flamebait, ass-backwards, and plain annoying-as-hell comments directly under MY OWN NAME - not even a handle!
The rest of/. consists of gutless feeble punks with no balls.
They don't call them Anonomous Cowards for no reason, now do they?
Am I the only person who notices that it's the Anonomous Cowards that post the flaimbait, the ass-backwards, and the plain annoying-as-hell comments the most?
Now please pay attention to the monitor in the foward part of the cabin as the following announcement is displayed on the overhead monitors.
If something "always sucked," "Jumped the shark, ect, that is your own opinion. Others share it, and that is good, but the way posts are posted on things like that, too often it is done in a way that makes it look like a fact. Wel guess what... it isn't! I think the Simpsons are good, AND Family Guy too, I think they didn't always rock, and don't always suck, but I don't try ot make it look like fact, because it is NOT!
Better yet, why do you, like
any others rely on others, and hell, even words to consider what is cool and not, instead of using your own judgement? I think that we have become too following as a society, which is truely sad.
The cliques are dead, we can make our own decisions now!
Hell, even if they weren't, I would tell somebody who harassed me for liking something they don't to fuck off.
Slashdot Mirror
I am going to answer each of your points drsquare in a numbered list.
A. No, I am surprised that they outlawed an activity that everybody does. Downloading copyrighted works freely is not illegal if you have permission, like with indie music, freeware software, etc. IT IS WITHOUT PERMISSION that is illegal, and the fact that the decision seemed broad is troubling to me.
You people just refuse to accept that there is such a thing as copyright law...
Generlization. NEXT!
Complete bullcrap to boot.
Consumers consume. They either do it legally by paying when having to, or getting it for free when not having to pay. Not all consumers pay for things, and NOT ALL (but some, maybe alot are) is illegal. And no, not all consumers have job. ANOTHER generalization.
I agree, but a question - what about images on websites and saving them to your computer for personal (non-distribution) use?
If you read the post, that is EXACTLY what I stated.
Bullshit it is. The differences are fundimental, philosophical, factual, and legally so.
With copying the software we have;
No loss of physical items/software, a somewhat uncertain idea of whether potential revenue can be gained from the copying act, and the easy fact that copyright infrignement was the crime the person is prosecuted for. Stealing the box from a store on the other hand, we have deprived them of the potential to make money from that one copy/box, not to mention taken away something that they don't have abymore, and finally, theft laws have been violated.,/P>
I don't know about you, but those are differences to me.
Shouldn't this read "you're not entitled to their work without fair compensation if it is requested"? Are we making it wrong unintentionally to download freeware/open source, and independent artist with this statement?
Then why the hell is it that nobody is being prosecuted under this ("Theft of Intellectual Property" ), and so far the only ones I see using it are those from the RISS/BSA/MPAA/Micro$oft?
Ekki Ekki Ekki Ekki Pinkang Zoop Boing!
I think the real reason we have "offensive" words is because people are oversensitive. In my humble opinion, the context of a word should be what is offended and not the word itself. http://www.nailmaster.ru/fuck.html Proper English usage of the Word Fuck for the humor lovers.
Bypassing an agreement and COPYING A FILE is not theft no matter how much it is incorporated with irrelivant matter ("Took", "reduced the price to 0$"???) Illegal (copyright infringement is) yes, but you and several others in this thread have been beaten to death on that argument that it is theft.
Without any inventors we wouldn't have the technology we use today, but we don't pay off the relatives of the inventors every day, do we?
I will only accept what the pro-DMCA crowd wants me to accept when they start calling a crime what it really is under law instead of using terms that imply forced morals. That means stopping the "stealing music" bullshit when talking about copyright infringement. We get that it's wrong windbags, but calling it something that it isn't made it take longer to figure out.
That is just as stupid as the "having [junk food in the machines] promotes obeisity" excuse spreading around now, which could be used against any food for that matter. It is just like George Carlin's "Big Electron," it just is, just like KaZaa is just software. The people are the ones that control the usage, it doesn't do anything on it's own!
What about -1, frot pst/P>?
I know things get tiring, but there ARE people after all people, me being one of them, that sometimes never gets tired of whatever jokes and clichés are thrown around here, and that is mainy because they are more tolerable to me than the clichés thrown around by some, like the RIAA/MPAA/BSA and their blind supporters. And where the hell do you get off trying to dictate what is and what isn't "normal"? How do you determine that anyways? What is a "normal" human being?
Stwarman argument, this does not change the fact that not everybody thinks the same way in what is and isn't funny, n'or will it change my opinion that if you don't like something, posting in the smartass way you did won't make things better/change things.
And how many people can mod down a comment at one time?
Whoever modded this as troll must really have a hard time dealing with facts.
You mean potentially illegal, and potentially copyright infringing, copyright infringement is that, copyright infringement, illegal copying, not theft.
"Fact it, 90% of BT traffic was copyrighted material that was illegal to distribute. "? Here we have another flaimbate throwing troll who gets statistics out of the rectal section of the library.
I say this should be modded as funny, IMO it was also a good response.
So... if I cite a law that states that the crime is copyright infringement, a crime, illegal, possibly wrong, will that shut you up?
They don't call them Anonomous Cowards for no reason, now do they?
Am I the only person who notices that it's the Anonomous Cowards that post the flaimbait, the ass-backwards, and the plain annoying-as-hell comments the most?
If something "always sucked," "Jumped the shark, ect, that is your own opinion. Others share it, and that is good, but the way posts are posted on things like that, too often it is done in a way that makes it look like a fact. Wel guess what... it isn't! I think the Simpsons are good, AND Family Guy too, I think they didn't always rock, and don't always suck, but I don't try ot make it look like fact, because it is NOT!
Better yet, why do you, like any others rely on others, and hell, even words to consider what is cool and not, instead of using your own judgement? I think that we have become too following as a society, which is truely sad. The cliques are dead, we can make our own decisions now! Hell, even if they weren't, I would tell somebody who harassed me for liking something they don't to fuck off.