You:...you claim that the pirated copies are equal in dollar value to the same number of sales in the unit price demanded by the manufacturer.
Me: Again, you are putting words into my mouth. Go back and read my actual statements.
You: I can only conclude that your own grasp of the arguments you are using is limited - probably due to limited linguistic and/or logical skills. Read it yourself. I understood it the first 3 times. Clearly you still don't.
You're severely weakening your own position simply by not agreeing that what you said is what you said - clearly you don't recognize the the concepts you're reciting when you see them written out using different words and phrasing.
Nonsense. I never said that the lost sales due to piracy were equal to what the manufacturers charge for the goods.
What I did say is "Even so, some legitimate copies of Windows would be sold in China, if only to the government, businesses, and few people who could afford it." I also said, "All the software companies, music companies, and movie companies would be making a great deal more money if piracy was not an issue."
I never said anything that could be translated to what you said I claimed above.
Me: You still haven't explained how the earnings of these companies aren't "legitimate".
You: It's pretty obvious to anyone who has been vicitmized by these corps - you clearly don't count yourself in that group - in fact, you apparently don't consider that such a group exists. You futher can't handle your own arguments without mindlessly repeating the same hackneyed PR copy - I don't choose to get into any depth of argument with you when you're already so obviously foundering on the basic precepts. You probably don't even realize that I'm not disagreeing with you in any meaningful way - you're just spoiling for a reason to retype whatever page of talking points you're copying.
I don't know of a single instance when a software company, record company, or movie company "victimized" me.
Even so, your response is a bunch of emotional masturbation that doesn't even address my point.
Some one is always stealing something, and someone is always chasing them for it.
Right... that circular logic is no justification for theft. If you want to use moral relativism, then at least pick an argument that isn't completely illogical or repugnant.
Me: The fact that you could download it in the first place means that the person you downloaded from liked it.
You: Simply and obviously fallacious.
The fact that you could find the download meant someone thought that the download was worthy of keeping and putting up for copying.
Again, you make no argument that addresses my point.
So you're saying that Microsoft selling WinXP in Thailand for ~$49US is illegal?
If what you're saying is true, which I doubt, then I'm sure you can get a legal Thai copy of WinXP for ~$49 US in the US.
Me: Why does China get to pay less for a CD than I do here in the US. We frickin made the CD in the first place.
You: LoL. Yeah. Right. We can't even make the widget to play the CD - I defy you to find one manufactured in the US. And the execs making the decisions in the entertainment industry (what CD's get made)? You want to claim they are American?
I was talking about the CD itself, not the player. But, if you want to go there, fine. The US fucking invented the CD player. I don't give a shit who makes it now. If some sweatshop in China can make one for $10, then fine. There's no profit in it for us to compete with them. That'll also help them claw their way out of poverty due to the failure of the communist economic system they used to live under. Then maybe they'll be able to legitimately pay for the things they want from us.
However, I was talking about the CD. I was talking abou
Me: Asking payment for my work is not "greedy" and "control-freak-like".
You: Depends on the work and the amount you ask. Furthermore, we're not discussing asking for payment, we're talking about a situation where the purported "owner" of the work is demanding to be paid, regardless of the relative merit of their work.
No, what we're discussing is China selling copies of software, CDs, and DVDs without paying the creators. I do not accept your adjustment of the argument.
If the Chinese do not think that US software, CDs, and DVDs "merit" use, then they do not need to use them in the first place. There are plenty of substitutions they could use which do have "merit". The fact that China does use US software, CDs, and DVDs means that China does consider them to have "relative merit". (As if that matters anyway...)
They know the price of our software, CDs, and DVDs. They don't have to use them, but the fact is they do use them. As such, they should pay for that use or stop using them.
You are clearly someone who believes that The Way It Has Always Been is the Way That It Is, and The Way That It Will Always Be. This is a fundamental difference between us...
I certainly do use history, facts, and rationality to anchor my arguments. You clearly prefer a bleeding-heart emotional approach where morality is relative. I myself am not an absolutist, or as rigid as you would believe. However, I am a nationalist who would prefer to see the US strengthen and prosper. And I don't believe that is possible when the world is copying what we work so hard on, without giving us the corresponding money or credit. Over the last 5 years the US suffered huge layoffs, partially due to financial losses at our companies. I would like to see those companies reduce their layoffs, and one way is to increase profits which would also decrease the need to cut costs.
I have come to the conclusion that you are not a reasonable individual, and are simply arguing the points you are arguing in order to have an opporutnity to Be Right, regardless of the broader issues you are glossing over.
I find people say stuff like this when they can't find any holes in my argument, but don't "feel" that I'm right. If you know any hole in my argument, then write it. Otherwise, this doesn't mean much.
And in case you missed it (for the last couple centuries), even the Law makes a distinction between intellectual property - which can be copied and remain more or less intact - and property. Your grocery store analogy just shows that you don't have any real understanding of your own argument...
Replace "grocery store" with "record store" along with "food" with "CD" and the story would be exactly the same.
That misses the point though. I wasn't trying to make an analogy between food and CDs. I was demonstrating how asking payment for work is not "greedy" and "control-freak-like".
Bottom line is: If everything you are whining for were to suddenly come to be, graven in Law, and fully enforced, the relative quality of Life on Planet Earth would not be improved one iota - the IP realm will continue to decay into recycling of the same old same old, and you will sit back fat and happy sipping your psuedo-beer, watching the tube, and pretending to create software that people want - talking up yourself and your pals. Nothing changed, nothing risked, nothing gained.
And nothing lost.
As it stands, I don't agree that quality of life would decrease. Those media and software companies would have more money to create the media and software that the world obviously wants. (Obviously since they go out of their way to steal it now by setting up whole industies to perpetuate that theft.) Those companies could then afford to take risks and truely innovate those products.
And since they had more money per released product, it's more likely that we would see prices of media and softwa
Those ideas come from somewhere. The fact that people see Indians and Pakistanis as convenience store clerks comes from running into them predominantly behind the counter at convenience stores.
The message that I was responding to said, "Most of the Indians and Pakistanis are well-educated. They are affluent and live in posh suburbs. They may not be accepted by the mainstream, but nobody really considers them inferior in any way. The tech companies are full of them." (Emphasis added.)
I'm sorry, but when the predominant view of Indians and Pakistanis are of running 7-11's, then that is the exact opposite of what the previous poster mentioned.
You may call them a "sizable minority", but I never met one until my 3rd year of college (incidently, when I briefly worked at a convenience store). And I'm a Army brat who did not live a sheltered life, moving every 2 years, growing up in California, Washington state, New Mexico, Texas, Missouri, New York, Washington DC, and Germany. Even now, there are very few in the Seattle area, despite all the large tech companies around here.
I seriously wouldn't doubt it. The Simpsons is about poking fun at stereotypes rather than being racist, sexist, or any other -ist.
My main point, which I realize I wasn't completely clear, is that the idea of Indians being successful, highly-educated members of American society is a relatively new one. It is also not a pervasive view. The Americans that are most likely to think that are in tech companies with the most exposure to H1-Bs.
The rest of the population only has experience with Indians from their exposure at 7-11 convenience stores or with the Simpsons. These Indians may not be poor, but they certainly do the "shit work" mentioned in the great-grandparent message. Of course, "shit work" is a relative term to each society. But in America, working career-long in a convenience store is generally considered shit.
To get back to the topic of this thread, I do not think that intelligence has anything to do with race. However, I do believe that intelligence, like any other trait, tends to run in families. The effects that we've seen and commented on in this discussion could be directly related to the level of intelligence required for the jobs needed to immigrate. Maybe the jobs that originally attracted the Pakistanis and Indians living in inner-city Britain didn't require that much intelligence. Therefore, those families still don't have much intelligence.
Most of the Indians and Pakistanis are well-educated. They are affluent and live in posh suburbs. They may not be accepted by the mainstream, but nobody really considers them inferior in any way. The tech companies are full of them.
7-11 is full of them as well. Ever watch the Simpson's? Apu was America's idea of an Indian before H1-Bs came around.
Even with years of H1-Bs coming to America, there are still plenty of Apus around.
The average Joe is more interested in the latest sports scores than the latest scientific developments. On top of that, ask the average person on the street who's worth more money, Michael Jordan or Bill Gates, and a surprising amount of people would say Michael Jordan... I mention that because I actually did have that argument with a coworker 7 years ago. She just wouldn't accept that Bill Gates was worth on the order of a thousand times the amount of Jordan.
On top of that, a large number of high school athletes seriously think they can get into professional sports, although they're more likely to win the lottery. They think that's the only way they can "make it". A lot of them skip studying in order to practise their athletics. No one around them tells them they're more likely to become successful by studying and getting a good education rather than hitting the hoops.
So, they hit the steriods and pump up. That's makes them super-aggressive, especially towards the weak nerds - a bunch of losers they perceive as having no chance of "making it".
You miss the point completely. Girls objectify themselves at a young age for their own vanity. In fact, they do it so universally across so many cultures that one wonders whether this is only due to nurture and not also nature. You can try teaching girls not to be vain, but then you're likely to be subverting their very desire, which brings more problems.
As for "perpetuating values", a game is going to perpetuate some value. There's no way to get around it - even Pac Man perpetuated a value or two. The problem lies with doing this while still being realistic to the majority of the people. In our society not many people would buy the idea of the hero performing all these feats to save a fat, ugly, pimply, old princess. Nor would they accept the idea of the hero going out of her way to save a skinny, ugly, balding, short prince. However, it is very realistic to see someone going out of their way for an attractive member of the opposite sex.
So then, I'm left with "perpetuating values" about what makes an attractive member of the opposite sex. That is why I brought up history. At some point, heavier women were considered the most attractive. Marilyn Monroe, for example, was supposedly size 14. At another point, milky white skin was most attractive because it meant you had enough money that you didn't have to do hard work outside. Once a lot of people spent time inside, having a tan year-round became attractive since that meant you had money and time to go somewhere warm and sunny during winter. These preferences change, and they change rapidly. That makes the real question what do you would prefer to perpetuate?
I have no problem with game makers perpetuating the slim, fit, athletic bodies for both male and female. Why? These are the most healthy of the bodies around. Being fat or overweight is unhealthy. Being skinny while also not working out is also unhealthy. Frankly, I would have a problem with a game promoting heavy models as the ideal since that is the most unhealthy to promote.
Since you agreed that they would not pay for it anyway, then the issue is not about lost profit, is it?
No, that is not what I agreed. I said not all would pay for CDs, DVDs, and software were piracy stamped out. So, we are talking about lost profit considering that some would pay for it otherwise. That level is certainly higher than the 10% of people paying now.
It is not stealing. It is using a copy without permission... It is about control. You want to dictate others how to use copies of your creation.
Using my property without permission... Hmm... And now I'm the "control freak"... How about I come to your home, invite all my friends, and throw a party, all without your permission. I'm sure you'd love that. I wonder who'll have sex in your bed first... Hey, don't be a "control freak" about this, they just want to have dirty butt-sex and leave the used condom on your pillow.
Property rights mean nothing without some level of control. And you can't have a capitalist society without property rights. Unless you want to dramatically change the structure of our society away from capitalism, your argument makes no sense.
Well you have the notion that it is your right to control what other people do with your creation. Other cultures might have a different view on that, especially since the idea of Intellectual Property is not yet 20 years old.
BS. Copyright was written in the US Constitution 200+ years ago. And that idea wasn't new even then.
So to them it is not "theft". It may be even morally just. They certainly did not do anything damaging to you.
You take my work, copy it everyone so that few people want a legitimate copy, then my company makes less money, and lays me off with a bunch of other co-workers in my community. Right... that wasn't damaging to me. It certainly wasn't damaging to my coworkers and therefore my community. BS.
You want people to stop getting laid off? Then stop making these nonsense arguments. Actually getting paid for our work helps our nation more than getting ripped off.
If I were the Chinese govt, I'd send you packing.
China all but begged to join the WTO. Considering that group will actually do this enforcement, I doubt China will send them packing.
You seem to generalise the whole of Chinese as uncivilized as they break software or IP laws. Let me ask you one question - are you implying this does not happen in the west?
No. Reread my statement. The problems were that they break their own laws and that the authorities look the other way. Their whole society condones the breaking of their own laws.
And no, this level of corruption does not occur in the west.
Are all the subscribers to the earlier form of Napster or Kazaa or Limewire or Bittorrent Chinese or Indians?
First off, not everything traded on these networks are stolen IP.
Second, these networks came around before the law was clear regarding the sharing of songs and movies on them. There was a significant legal question regarding fair use when these networks first started that has since been answered. In other words, it was not specifically illegal to share songs and movies on these networks when they first arrived. Therefore, the first users of these networks were not breaking their own law when they first used them.
And how can you say the whole Chinese society or Indian society condones the breaking of the laws? Where have you got first hand information - have you lived in China or India? Are you quoting main stream media?
You're the only one talking about India. I haven't said anything about them. My specific comments are targeted at China. Let me guess, are you Indian? Why are you getting defensive about India when I haven't said anything about them?
CDs and DVDs in China are sold on street corners for $1-$2 dollars a piece. A business can't survive without customers that purchase their goods. Factories are set up for the mass production of pirated goods. That makes for an entire industry based on pirated goods. Considering law enforcement ignores these pirates, that means that Chinese society does condone this behavior.
Agreed there is piracy of DVDs happening from China. And I gave you a reason for that...which does not mean the society condones such a practice.
Oh really? Someone is buying those CDs and DVDs. Someone is buying so many of them that they have street vendors sitting on the street corner selling them in broad view of the everyone, including the local police. Sounds like a large part of the population condones this behavior.
And I have seen pirated DVD or software in 'your cities' too.
Wow. I haven't. You've actually seen people selling this stuff on the street corner in the US? In front of the police? That's new. Where can I see this for myself? Can you take a picture?
Your attitude reminds me of Mary Antoniette - if they cant have bread, why dont they eat cake. If they cannot afford the DVDs on sale, why dont they plainly walk away.
There is a big difference here. People don't starve to death when they don't get a foreign CD. There is no penalty for walking away from the foreign CD or DVD.
People don't even have to give up music or movies since there are plenty of local CDs or DVDs. The problem only comes when someone wants a foreign CD. Your analogy is a poor one.
Now we're getting somewhere. You are assuming that there are ten million Chinese who are in the middle class and need to upgrade or install Windows every month. Given the normal usage patterns in the US and the rest of the world, that would indicate an installed base of, carry the 1, over a billion Chinese customers. I'm pretty sure that XP sold less that 20 million copies world-wide during the first two months. Again, there are very few Chinese who can afford retail copies of Windows. The whole piracy thing is a diversion.
I was specifically talking about CDs, which are dramatically cheaper than copies of Windows. But I guess I can't expect you to actually follow the conversation.
You wouldn't be able to sell many Ford Explorers in China because there is a very limited customer base. It's the same with MS Windows. The pirated copies of Windows do not equal lost sales for Microsoft any more than Ford Explorers not sold in China equal lost sales for Ford.
The price of a car does not come close to the price of Windows. The analogy is bad if only in the scale of the price of the two products.
The Chinese government has enough cash to pay for legitimate copies of Windows. Large businesses in China also have enough money. But, neither the Chinese government or large Chinese businesses will pay for Windows if piracy is rampant.
Unenforced laws = no laws, much like our H1-B program restrictions.
Bzzt... wrong! The difference is that the laws are on the books. And these people are breaking their own law. While enforcement is slack right now, these people could face penalties in the future for their current actions.
I believe the topic is about using taxpayer money to create a new bureaucracy to *protect* American corporations from the evil, pirating Chinese who couldn't afford to buy their products in the first place. It's the same corporations that are moving jobs and their IP to India and China. It's a boondoggle, and if the topic is now encompassing more than you can process, that's too bad.
See the user that started this topic... Oh! That just happens to by my username! Nice of you to point out the topic that I started.
So, I guess it's not hypocritical of China to create IP laws to join the WTO and then not enforce those laws when it comes to foreign made software, CDs, and DVDs. Oh wait... yes it is!
Me: "Let's see how you like giving away your work for free. "
You: Many people do just this: there's a large and growing movement based around the concept that you may have heard of.
That's fine if you want to do that. However, it is not greedy of me to ask for compensation for my work.
But _expecting_ people to pay whatever you demand using threats of force (and putting people in prison is a threat of force) definitely is greedy and control-freak like -- it is also completely at odds with the way a capitalistic system is supposed to work (in capitalism, market forces set prices, not cartels protected by governments).
If you want to use my software, then you pay the price that I set. Otherwise, use someone else's software or create your own. If I set my price too high, then no one will buy my goods. That is how market forces work.
Asking someone to pay is not "greedy" and "control-freak-like" if they've used my product or service. That's the basis of capitalism.
... doesn't exactly bode well for their chances of convincing a large power like China to spend time, effort, and money on a problem that obviously has no importance to them. After all, what leverage do they have?
China has a definite want to for trade with other countries. In fact, it's economy hinges on foreign trade. That's why they were desperate to join the WTO in the first place and enacted the required IP laws.
Other countries have a definite lever to pull, and that is the WTO. By not enforcing their own IP laws, China has left the door open for possible sanctions and other remedies through the WTO. China is not interested in damaging their own economy, so they will make those changes once the issue is officially presented. The WTO does not take these problems lightly.
Countless American and European companies now depend on cheap chinese imports for clothing, electronics, engineering components, and a huge range of other goods, so any effective trade embargoes would damage their own economies at least as badly as China's.
China is not the only country that makes cheap products. India is just as large and just as cheap. Southeast Asia, Africa, and Eastern Europe are equally as cheap. It would take some time for adjustment, but there would be little damage.
The concept of IP has only existed in a limited set of geographical locations for (in historic terms) a very short time, yet it is already showing the signs of imminent collapse because successive lobby groups have managed to convince law makers to shift the balance too far towards the IP owners.
I don't know where you get this idea that IP is on the verge of "collapse". No one is talking of musicians giving up the rights to their music. No one is talking of film makers giving up the rights to their movies.
IP is addressed by the WTO. Any country interested in joining the WTO must create IP laws within their country. With countries joining the WTO on a yearly basis, I see IP laws spreading, not "collapsing" as you say.
I admit I know nothing of WTO (expect it means "World Trade Organization"), so I might be skating in thin ice here...
Yes, you are. The WTO does care about trade and subjects like intellectual property. These topics are the entire reason that the WTO was created. To quote from the WTO website:
Copyright
The TRIPS agreement ensures that computer programs will be protected as literary works under the Berne Convention and outlines how databases should be protected.
It also expands international copyright rules to cover rental rights. Authors of computer programs and producers of sound recordings must have the right to prohibit the commercial rental of their works to the public. A similar exclusive right applies to films where commercial rental has led to widespread copying, affecting copyright-owners' potential earnings from their films.
The agreement says performers must also have the right to prevent unauthorized recording, reproduction and broadcast of live performances (bootlegging) for no less than 50 years. Producers of sound recordings must have the right to prevent the unauthorized reproduction of recordings for a period of 50 years.
In short, these are international agreements that have already been made. China agreed to follow them and, in fact, has placed these laws in its own books. However, China has done almost nothing in enforcing their own laws regarding IP. As such, the US has a strong case against them if they were to bring it to the WTO.
Me: They legitimately created it and legitimately own it. If you want a copy, then you pay. If you don't want a copy, then don't pay. It is that frickin easy.
You: You get out of a pub and want to pee. Very badly. There are plenty of toilets in the street but every one asks for $5,000 for you to take a pee. Now, that is half your month's salary. You revolt, because it is hard earned money. You pee onto a bush nearby, to be seen by noone. You go home. That is quite similar to the situation with the price of prepackaged culture in China.
Your analogy is flawed. If I write a piece of software and sell it for a price that is too high for you, then you can always go out and use a competitor's program. Or, you can go out and create your own program (similar to your peeing in the bush example).
Stealing software in this example would be akin to breaking into one of those $5000 toilets.
Your analogy is further flawed because it doesn't take into account locally produced software, CDs, and DVDs that are all available for reduced price due to the reduced cost of production. To use your example, all the foreign toilets in town are $5000, but you can always go to a local toilet for $1000.
Me: Even if only 1% of the population bought a CD every month, that would mean 10,000,000+ copies sold a month
You: That is denying the other 99% of your work. If everybody insisted on the same $10 price, it would lock out 99% of the population out of cultural works. Guess what those people would do next. Pirate!
The US is not the only creator of software, CDs, and DVDs. China has plenty of software developers, musicians, and movie makers. They can easily create all the culture they want without having to steal ours. And they can sell theirs for less since the cost of living in China is far cheaper than the cost of living in the US.
Me: They legitimately created it and legitimately own it. If you want a copy, then you pay. If you don't want a copy, then don't pay. It is that frickin easy.
You: Man, you live in a fantasy world. Let me put it this way: If you are not willing to sell 0s and 1s for a fair price, people will copy it for free. And if you try to criminalize it, you will have to put half the people in jail.
If you want the code that I created, then you should pay the price that I set. If you don't like that price, then go away. Go off and use my competitor. Or, even better, go out and create your own program. Then, when you try to sell your work, maybe you will appreciate this problem. Let's see how you like giving away your work for free.
If you want to steal my work, then you should be put in jail. You're nothing but a common thief.
I think the price you ask is just too high on the balance of things. To be willing to ruin the lives of so many people, just to be able to dictate your price.
That does not justify stealing my work and ruining my life and the lives of my fellow workers. If you don't want my software, my CD, or my DVD at the price that I set, then you can easily move on to my competition. If I charge too much, then that gives great incentive to my competitors to charge less, undercut me, and steal my customers.
The price of those goods pays my paycheck which feeds me, clothes me, and pays for my shelter. The price of those goods pays the paycheck for many, many of my coworkers in my community as well. I am not going to sacrifice myself nor my community to a thief like you.
You and people like you are ruining IT in America from attitudes like this.
Me: Frankly, it is not unreasonable to assume that someone out of the billion+ people living in China would buy a $10 CD if piracy was stamped out. Further, it is not unreasonable to assume that even a low percentage of those billion+ people living in China would buy a $10 CD if piracy was stamped out.
You: That is the problem. You want the world to suit your will. It just won't work. Even if you think what you want is 'moral'. It is not. It is greedy and control-freak-like.
Excuse me? Asking payment for my work is not "greedy" and "control-freak-like". That is the way the world operates and you are delusional to think otherwise.
You can not go into a grocery store, put food into your cart, and leave the store without paying. Complaining that the grocery store charges too much won't help you. Screaming about the "greedy" and "control-freak-like" cashiers won't help you. The cops will come, arrest you, and you will have to stand in front of a judge. At that point, I'd like to see how any of your agruments stand up.
You seem fixated on this "civilized world" comment. When people in China break their own IP laws in order to steal software, CD, and DVD content, then that is definition of uncivilized behavior. These actions are worsened by the corrupt authorities who look the other way, although they know that these pirates are breaking the law. Their whole society condones the breaking of their own laws. That certainly does not sound civilized to me.
Most people in the 'civilized world' might use something called a 'credit card' to buy stuff they are unable to afford. I dont think 'they merely walk by' is what happens.
Let me tell you a secret about credit cards... You have to pay them back. That's right! It's not free money. Companies do expect you to pay them back at some point.
And since those people can pay back those credit cards, then those same people can also afford those goods.
Why would China enforce a law that would cause money to flow from China to US ? That would be a pretty stupid move from their part.
To join the WTO, China had to create IP laws in the first place. Were the US to bring a complaint to the WTO, then the Chinese would have to comply to remain a member and not receive sanctions. China will comply, if only to keep the rest of their economy running.
When most people in the civilized world see something they can't afford, they merely walk by and don't buy it. Those people then don't go running around, breaking the law to try to get it.
If you can't outright buy a DVD, then how about renting it like the rest of us. Certainly, the video rental stores have the money to purchase the newer DVDs. Even so, I myself certainly don't go out buying every DVD that I watch. Why should they have that right and I don't. Your justification is ridiculous.
That's not what I said at all. If you don't know the difference, then I suggest you take an economics class. You are obviously too dense to pick this up from a few readings on Slashdot.
The last I heard, there were no Chinese laws regarding foreign IP.
You need to look again. China joined the WTO in 2001. Before and since that time, they had to have these laws on the books. The problem is that China isn't enforcing their own laws.
The answer is to remain here in first place and keep our industry here rather than wasting resources chasing phantom losses claimed by businesses that are busy leaving the country while claiming they need protection.
Again, can you stick to the frickin topic. We're talking about the Chinese and the wholesale theft of software, CDs, and DVDs. We're not talking about how mean and big American corporations are.
I would call myself self-sufficient. I make my own money and pay my own bills. At the end of the month, I definitely have extra left over. But if someone wants to give me a present, I accept it.
I guess then according to you, I wouldn't be self-sufficient.
So it's only about a level playing field for companies that create IP and not for companies that make textiles or garments or electronics? Where is your angst for them and the people they employed?
I fought that battle previously. If you actually subscribe to Slashdot, you can look up all my previous comments. Even so, you are again going off topic.
Tell that to the government and the SCOTUS after the recent eminent domain decision.
No where in the constitution does it set up capitalism as our economic system. Capitalism is a result of the choices that our federal and state legislatures made. SCOTUS turned over eminent domain decisions to local governments, which are now adjusting to the decision by enacting new laws to protect owners.
And again, you are going off topic.
You're saying that one person would have bought a legal copy if the Chinese weren't selling cracked copies on the street? Doesn't sound like much of a gain for American business to me.
The actual number is somewhere between one and the number of pirated copies. Given that we're talking about a billion+ people, it's likely more than a few would buy a legitimate copy. Even if the number is as low as 1% per month, that's 10,000,000 copies sold each month. That's hardly chump change and certainly more than the nothing we're selling now.
Me: And since someone would buy those CDs, DVDs, and software from US were they not being pirated, then it does affect the bottom line. Considering that we're talking about a country with over a billion people, it would affect the bottom line dramatically.
You: There are millions of Chinese who would love to own a Ford Explorer. They are very difficult to copy and sell on the street corner. I suggest you open a Ford dealership in China and make boatloads of money. Let me know how it works out.
Stick to the topic. We're talking CDs, DVDs, and software. A frickin car is a whole different ball game.
Even so, foreign companies are selling cars in China. Mercedes is just as much as status symbol there as it is here.
Slashdot Mirror
You: ...you claim that the pirated copies are equal in dollar value to the same number of sales in the unit price demanded by the manufacturer.
Me: Again, you are putting words into my mouth. Go back and read my actual statements.
You: I can only conclude that your own grasp of the arguments you are using is limited - probably due to limited linguistic and/or logical skills. Read it yourself. I understood it the first 3 times. Clearly you still don't. You're severely weakening your own position simply by not agreeing that what you said is what you said - clearly you don't recognize the the concepts you're reciting when you see them written out using different words and phrasing.
Nonsense. I never said that the lost sales due to piracy were equal to what the manufacturers charge for the goods.
What I did say is "Even so, some legitimate copies of Windows would be sold in China, if only to the government, businesses, and few people who could afford it." I also said, "All the software companies, music companies, and movie companies would be making a great deal more money if piracy was not an issue."
I never said anything that could be translated to what you said I claimed above.
Me: You still haven't explained how the earnings of these companies aren't "legitimate".
You: It's pretty obvious to anyone who has been vicitmized by these corps - you clearly don't count yourself in that group - in fact, you apparently don't consider that such a group exists. You futher can't handle your own arguments without mindlessly repeating the same hackneyed PR copy - I don't choose to get into any depth of argument with you when you're already so obviously foundering on the basic precepts. You probably don't even realize that I'm not disagreeing with you in any meaningful way - you're just spoiling for a reason to retype whatever page of talking points you're copying.
I don't know of a single instance when a software company, record company, or movie company "victimized" me.
Even so, your response is a bunch of emotional masturbation that doesn't even address my point.
Some one is always stealing something, and someone is always chasing them for it.
Right... that circular logic is no justification for theft. If you want to use moral relativism, then at least pick an argument that isn't completely illogical or repugnant.
Me: The fact that you could download it in the first place means that the person you downloaded from liked it.
You: Simply and obviously fallacious.
The fact that you could find the download meant someone thought that the download was worthy of keeping and putting up for copying.
Again, you make no argument that addresses my point.
So you're saying that Microsoft selling WinXP in Thailand for ~$49US is illegal?
If what you're saying is true, which I doubt, then I'm sure you can get a legal Thai copy of WinXP for ~$49 US in the US.
Me: Why does China get to pay less for a CD than I do here in the US. We frickin made the CD in the first place.
You: LoL. Yeah. Right. We can't even make the widget to play the CD - I defy you to find one manufactured in the US. And the execs making the decisions in the entertainment industry (what CD's get made)? You want to claim they are American?
I was talking about the CD itself, not the player. But, if you want to go there, fine. The US fucking invented the CD player. I don't give a shit who makes it now. If some sweatshop in China can make one for $10, then fine. There's no profit in it for us to compete with them. That'll also help them claw their way out of poverty due to the failure of the communist economic system they used to live under. Then maybe they'll be able to legitimately pay for the things they want from us.
However, I was talking about the CD. I was talking abou
Me: Asking payment for my work is not "greedy" and "control-freak-like".
You: Depends on the work and the amount you ask. Furthermore, we're not discussing asking for payment, we're talking about a situation where the purported "owner" of the work is demanding to be paid, regardless of the relative merit of their work.
No, what we're discussing is China selling copies of software, CDs, and DVDs without paying the creators. I do not accept your adjustment of the argument.
If the Chinese do not think that US software, CDs, and DVDs "merit" use, then they do not need to use them in the first place. There are plenty of substitutions they could use which do have "merit". The fact that China does use US software, CDs, and DVDs means that China does consider them to have "relative merit". (As if that matters anyway...)
They know the price of our software, CDs, and DVDs. They don't have to use them, but the fact is they do use them. As such, they should pay for that use or stop using them.
You are clearly someone who believes that The Way It Has Always Been is the Way That It Is, and The Way That It Will Always Be. This is a fundamental difference between us...
I certainly do use history, facts, and rationality to anchor my arguments. You clearly prefer a bleeding-heart emotional approach where morality is relative. I myself am not an absolutist, or as rigid as you would believe. However, I am a nationalist who would prefer to see the US strengthen and prosper. And I don't believe that is possible when the world is copying what we work so hard on, without giving us the corresponding money or credit. Over the last 5 years the US suffered huge layoffs, partially due to financial losses at our companies. I would like to see those companies reduce their layoffs, and one way is to increase profits which would also decrease the need to cut costs.
I have come to the conclusion that you are not a reasonable individual, and are simply arguing the points you are arguing in order to have an opporutnity to Be Right, regardless of the broader issues you are glossing over.
I find people say stuff like this when they can't find any holes in my argument, but don't "feel" that I'm right. If you know any hole in my argument, then write it. Otherwise, this doesn't mean much.
And in case you missed it (for the last couple centuries), even the Law makes a distinction between intellectual property - which can be copied and remain more or less intact - and property. Your grocery store analogy just shows that you don't have any real understanding of your own argument...
Replace "grocery store" with "record store" along with "food" with "CD" and the story would be exactly the same.
That misses the point though. I wasn't trying to make an analogy between food and CDs. I was demonstrating how asking payment for work is not "greedy" and "control-freak-like".
Bottom line is: If everything you are whining for were to suddenly come to be, graven in Law, and fully enforced, the relative quality of Life on Planet Earth would not be improved one iota - the IP realm will continue to decay into recycling of the same old same old, and you will sit back fat and happy sipping your psuedo-beer, watching the tube, and pretending to create software that people want - talking up yourself and your pals. Nothing changed, nothing risked, nothing gained.
And nothing lost.
As it stands, I don't agree that quality of life would decrease. Those media and software companies would have more money to create the media and software that the world obviously wants. (Obviously since they go out of their way to steal it now by setting up whole industies to perpetuate that theft.) Those companies could then afford to take risks and truely innovate those products.
And since they had more money per released product, it's more likely that we would see prices of media and softwa
Those ideas come from somewhere. The fact that people see Indians and Pakistanis as convenience store clerks comes from running into them predominantly behind the counter at convenience stores.
The message that I was responding to said, "Most of the Indians and Pakistanis are well-educated. They are affluent and live in posh suburbs. They may not be accepted by the mainstream, but nobody really considers them inferior in any way. The tech companies are full of them." (Emphasis added.)
I'm sorry, but when the predominant view of Indians and Pakistanis are of running 7-11's, then that is the exact opposite of what the previous poster mentioned.
You may call them a "sizable minority", but I never met one until my 3rd year of college (incidently, when I briefly worked at a convenience store). And I'm a Army brat who did not live a sheltered life, moving every 2 years, growing up in California, Washington state, New Mexico, Texas, Missouri, New York, Washington DC, and Germany. Even now, there are very few in the Seattle area, despite all the large tech companies around here.
I seriously wouldn't doubt it. The Simpsons is about poking fun at stereotypes rather than being racist, sexist, or any other -ist.
My main point, which I realize I wasn't completely clear, is that the idea of Indians being successful, highly-educated members of American society is a relatively new one. It is also not a pervasive view. The Americans that are most likely to think that are in tech companies with the most exposure to H1-Bs.
The rest of the population only has experience with Indians from their exposure at 7-11 convenience stores or with the Simpsons. These Indians may not be poor, but they certainly do the "shit work" mentioned in the great-grandparent message. Of course, "shit work" is a relative term to each society. But in America, working career-long in a convenience store is generally considered shit.
To get back to the topic of this thread, I do not think that intelligence has anything to do with race. However, I do believe that intelligence, like any other trait, tends to run in families. The effects that we've seen and commented on in this discussion could be directly related to the level of intelligence required for the jobs needed to immigrate. Maybe the jobs that originally attracted the Pakistanis and Indians living in inner-city Britain didn't require that much intelligence. Therefore, those families still don't have much intelligence.
Most of the Indians and Pakistanis are well-educated. They are affluent and live in posh suburbs. They may not be accepted by the mainstream, but nobody really considers them inferior in any way. The tech companies are full of them.
7-11 is full of them as well. Ever watch the Simpson's? Apu was America's idea of an Indian before H1-Bs came around.
Even with years of H1-Bs coming to America, there are still plenty of Apus around.
Thank you, come again...
No kidding. Mod parent up!
The average Joe is more interested in the latest sports scores than the latest scientific developments. On top of that, ask the average person on the street who's worth more money, Michael Jordan or Bill Gates, and a surprising amount of people would say Michael Jordan... I mention that because I actually did have that argument with a coworker 7 years ago. She just wouldn't accept that Bill Gates was worth on the order of a thousand times the amount of Jordan.
On top of that, a large number of high school athletes seriously think they can get into professional sports, although they're more likely to win the lottery. They think that's the only way they can "make it". A lot of them skip studying in order to practise their athletics. No one around them tells them they're more likely to become successful by studying and getting a good education rather than hitting the hoops.
So, they hit the steriods and pump up. That's makes them super-aggressive, especially towards the weak nerds - a bunch of losers they perceive as having no chance of "making it".
You miss the point completely. Girls objectify themselves at a young age for their own vanity. In fact, they do it so universally across so many cultures that one wonders whether this is only due to nurture and not also nature. You can try teaching girls not to be vain, but then you're likely to be subverting their very desire, which brings more problems.
As for "perpetuating values", a game is going to perpetuate some value. There's no way to get around it - even Pac Man perpetuated a value or two. The problem lies with doing this while still being realistic to the majority of the people. In our society not many people would buy the idea of the hero performing all these feats to save a fat, ugly, pimply, old princess. Nor would they accept the idea of the hero going out of her way to save a skinny, ugly, balding, short prince. However, it is very realistic to see someone going out of their way for an attractive member of the opposite sex.
So then, I'm left with "perpetuating values" about what makes an attractive member of the opposite sex. That is why I brought up history. At some point, heavier women were considered the most attractive. Marilyn Monroe, for example, was supposedly size 14. At another point, milky white skin was most attractive because it meant you had enough money that you didn't have to do hard work outside. Once a lot of people spent time inside, having a tan year-round became attractive since that meant you had money and time to go somewhere warm and sunny during winter. These preferences change, and they change rapidly. That makes the real question what do you would prefer to perpetuate?
I have no problem with game makers perpetuating the slim, fit, athletic bodies for both male and female. Why? These are the most healthy of the bodies around. Being fat or overweight is unhealthy. Being skinny while also not working out is also unhealthy. Frankly, I would have a problem with a game promoting heavy models as the ideal since that is the most unhealthy to promote.
The more prevalent those copies are, the more a society tolerates those copies, then the less likely that people will purchase legal copies.
Since you agreed that they would not pay for it anyway, then the issue is not about lost profit, is it?
No, that is not what I agreed. I said not all would pay for CDs, DVDs, and software were piracy stamped out. So, we are talking about lost profit considering that some would pay for it otherwise. That level is certainly higher than the 10% of people paying now.
It is not stealing. It is using a copy without permission... It is about control. You want to dictate others how to use copies of your creation.
Using my property without permission... Hmm... And now I'm the "control freak"... How about I come to your home, invite all my friends, and throw a party, all without your permission. I'm sure you'd love that. I wonder who'll have sex in your bed first... Hey, don't be a "control freak" about this, they just want to have dirty butt-sex and leave the used condom on your pillow.
Property rights mean nothing without some level of control. And you can't have a capitalist society without property rights. Unless you want to dramatically change the structure of our society away from capitalism, your argument makes no sense.
Well you have the notion that it is your right to control what other people do with your creation. Other cultures might have a different view on that, especially since the idea of Intellectual Property is not yet 20 years old.
BS. Copyright was written in the US Constitution 200+ years ago. And that idea wasn't new even then.
So to them it is not "theft". It may be even morally just. They certainly did not do anything damaging to you.
You take my work, copy it everyone so that few people want a legitimate copy, then my company makes less money, and lays me off with a bunch of other co-workers in my community. Right... that wasn't damaging to me. It certainly wasn't damaging to my coworkers and therefore my community. BS.
You want people to stop getting laid off? Then stop making these nonsense arguments. Actually getting paid for our work helps our nation more than getting ripped off.
If I were the Chinese govt, I'd send you packing.
China all but begged to join the WTO. Considering that group will actually do this enforcement, I doubt China will send them packing.
You seem to generalise the whole of Chinese as uncivilized as they break software or IP laws. Let me ask you one question - are you implying this does not happen in the west?
No. Reread my statement. The problems were that they break their own laws and that the authorities look the other way. Their whole society condones the breaking of their own laws.
And no, this level of corruption does not occur in the west.
Are all the subscribers to the earlier form of Napster or Kazaa or Limewire or Bittorrent Chinese or Indians?
First off, not everything traded on these networks are stolen IP.
Second, these networks came around before the law was clear regarding the sharing of songs and movies on them. There was a significant legal question regarding fair use when these networks first started that has since been answered. In other words, it was not specifically illegal to share songs and movies on these networks when they first arrived. Therefore, the first users of these networks were not breaking their own law when they first used them.
And how can you say the whole Chinese society or Indian society condones the breaking of the laws? Where have you got first hand information - have you lived in China or India? Are you quoting main stream media?
You're the only one talking about India. I haven't said anything about them. My specific comments are targeted at China. Let me guess, are you Indian? Why are you getting defensive about India when I haven't said anything about them?
CDs and DVDs in China are sold on street corners for $1-$2 dollars a piece. A business can't survive without customers that purchase their goods. Factories are set up for the mass production of pirated goods. That makes for an entire industry based on pirated goods. Considering law enforcement ignores these pirates, that means that Chinese society does condone this behavior.
Agreed there is piracy of DVDs happening from China. And I gave you a reason for that...which does not mean the society condones such a practice.
Oh really? Someone is buying those CDs and DVDs. Someone is buying so many of them that they have street vendors sitting on the street corner selling them in broad view of the everyone, including the local police. Sounds like a large part of the population condones this behavior.
And I have seen pirated DVD or software in 'your cities' too.
Wow. I haven't. You've actually seen people selling this stuff on the street corner in the US? In front of the police? That's new. Where can I see this for myself? Can you take a picture?
Your attitude reminds me of Mary Antoniette - if they cant have bread, why dont they eat cake. If they cannot afford the DVDs on sale, why dont they plainly walk away.
There is a big difference here. People don't starve to death when they don't get a foreign CD. There is no penalty for walking away from the foreign CD or DVD.
People don't even have to give up music or movies since there are plenty of local CDs or DVDs. The problem only comes when someone wants a foreign CD. Your analogy is a poor one.
Now we're getting somewhere. You are assuming that there are ten million Chinese who are in the middle class and need to upgrade or install Windows every month. Given the normal usage patterns in the US and the rest of the world, that would indicate an installed base of, carry the 1, over a billion Chinese customers. I'm pretty sure that XP sold less that 20 million copies world-wide during the first two months. Again, there are very few Chinese who can afford retail copies of Windows. The whole piracy thing is a diversion.
I was specifically talking about CDs, which are dramatically cheaper than copies of Windows. But I guess I can't expect you to actually follow the conversation.
You wouldn't be able to sell many Ford Explorers in China because there is a very limited customer base. It's the same with MS Windows. The pirated copies of Windows do not equal lost sales for Microsoft any more than Ford Explorers not sold in China equal lost sales for Ford.
The price of a car does not come close to the price of Windows. The analogy is bad if only in the scale of the price of the two products.
The Chinese government has enough cash to pay for legitimate copies of Windows. Large businesses in China also have enough money. But, neither the Chinese government or large Chinese businesses will pay for Windows if piracy is rampant.
Unenforced laws = no laws, much like our H1-B program restrictions.
Bzzt... wrong! The difference is that the laws are on the books. And these people are breaking their own law. While enforcement is slack right now, these people could face penalties in the future for their current actions.
I believe the topic is about using taxpayer money to create a new bureaucracy to *protect* American corporations from the evil, pirating Chinese who couldn't afford to buy their products in the first place. It's the same corporations that are moving jobs and their IP to India and China. It's a boondoggle, and if the topic is now encompassing more than you can process, that's too bad.
See the user that started this topic... Oh! That just happens to by my username! Nice of you to point out the topic that I started.
I wasn't aware we were talking about the US...
So, I guess it's not hypocritical of China to create IP laws to join the WTO and then not enforce those laws when it comes to foreign made software, CDs, and DVDs. Oh wait... yes it is!
Me: "Let's see how you like giving away your work for free. "
... doesn't exactly bode well for their chances of convincing a large power like China to spend time, effort, and money on a problem that obviously has no importance to them. After all, what leverage do they have?
You: Many people do just this: there's a large and growing movement based around the concept that you may have heard of.
That's fine if you want to do that. However, it is not greedy of me to ask for compensation for my work.
But _expecting_ people to pay whatever you demand using threats of force (and putting people in prison is a threat of force) definitely is greedy and control-freak like -- it is also completely at odds with the way a capitalistic system is supposed to work (in capitalism, market forces set prices, not cartels protected by governments).
If you want to use my software, then you pay the price that I set. Otherwise, use someone else's software or create your own. If I set my price too high, then no one will buy my goods. That is how market forces work.
Asking someone to pay is not "greedy" and "control-freak-like" if they've used my product or service. That's the basis of capitalism.
China has a definite want to for trade with other countries. In fact, it's economy hinges on foreign trade. That's why they were desperate to join the WTO in the first place and enacted the required IP laws.
Other countries have a definite lever to pull, and that is the WTO. By not enforcing their own IP laws, China has left the door open for possible sanctions and other remedies through the WTO. China is not interested in damaging their own economy, so they will make those changes once the issue is officially presented. The WTO does not take these problems lightly.
Countless American and European companies now depend on cheap chinese imports for clothing, electronics, engineering components, and a huge range of other goods, so any effective trade embargoes would damage their own economies at least as badly as China's.
China is not the only country that makes cheap products. India is just as large and just as cheap. Southeast Asia, Africa, and Eastern Europe are equally as cheap. It would take some time for adjustment, but there would be little damage.
The concept of IP has only existed in a limited set of geographical locations for (in historic terms) a very short time, yet it is already showing the signs of imminent collapse because successive lobby groups have managed to convince law makers to shift the balance too far towards the IP owners.
I don't know where you get this idea that IP is on the verge of "collapse". No one is talking of musicians giving up the rights to their music. No one is talking of film makers giving up the rights to their movies.
IP is addressed by the WTO. Any country interested in joining the WTO must create IP laws within their country. With countries joining the WTO on a yearly basis, I see IP laws spreading, not "collapsing" as you say.
I admit I know nothing of WTO (expect it means "World Trade Organization"), so I might be skating in thin ice here...
Yes, you are. The WTO does care about trade and subjects like intellectual property. These topics are the entire reason that the WTO was created. To quote from the WTO website:
Copyright
The TRIPS agreement ensures that computer programs will be protected as literary works under the Berne Convention and outlines how databases should be protected.
It also expands international copyright rules to cover rental rights. Authors of computer programs and producers of sound recordings must have the right to prohibit the commercial rental of their works to the public. A similar exclusive right applies to films where commercial rental has led to widespread copying, affecting copyright-owners' potential earnings from their films.
The agreement says performers must also have the right to prevent unauthorized recording, reproduction and broadcast of live performances (bootlegging) for no less than 50 years. Producers of sound recordings must have the right to prevent the unauthorized reproduction of recordings for a period of 50 years. In short, these are international agreements that have already been made. China agreed to follow them and, in fact, has placed these laws in its own books. However, China has done almost nothing in enforcing their own laws regarding IP. As such, the US has a strong case against them if they were to bring it to the WTO.
Me: They legitimately created it and legitimately own it. If you want a copy, then you pay. If you don't want a copy, then don't pay. It is that frickin easy.
You: You get out of a pub and want to pee. Very badly. There are plenty of toilets in the street but every one asks for $5,000 for you to take a pee. Now, that is half your month's salary. You revolt, because it is hard earned money. You pee onto a bush nearby, to be seen by noone. You go home. That is quite similar to the situation with the price of prepackaged culture in China.
Your analogy is flawed. If I write a piece of software and sell it for a price that is too high for you, then you can always go out and use a competitor's program. Or, you can go out and create your own program (similar to your peeing in the bush example).
Stealing software in this example would be akin to breaking into one of those $5000 toilets.
Your analogy is further flawed because it doesn't take into account locally produced software, CDs, and DVDs that are all available for reduced price due to the reduced cost of production. To use your example, all the foreign toilets in town are $5000, but you can always go to a local toilet for $1000.
Me: Even if only 1% of the population bought a CD every month, that would mean 10,000,000+ copies sold a month
You: That is denying the other 99% of your work. If everybody insisted on the same $10 price, it would lock out 99% of the population out of cultural works. Guess what those people would do next. Pirate!
The US is not the only creator of software, CDs, and DVDs. China has plenty of software developers, musicians, and movie makers. They can easily create all the culture they want without having to steal ours. And they can sell theirs for less since the cost of living in China is far cheaper than the cost of living in the US.
Me: They legitimately created it and legitimately own it. If you want a copy, then you pay. If you don't want a copy, then don't pay. It is that frickin easy.
You: Man, you live in a fantasy world. Let me put it this way: If you are not willing to sell 0s and 1s for a fair price, people will copy it for free. And if you try to criminalize it, you will have to put half the people in jail.
If you want the code that I created, then you should pay the price that I set. If you don't like that price, then go away. Go off and use my competitor. Or, even better, go out and create your own program. Then, when you try to sell your work, maybe you will appreciate this problem. Let's see how you like giving away your work for free.
If you want to steal my work, then you should be put in jail. You're nothing but a common thief.
I think the price you ask is just too high on the balance of things. To be willing to ruin the lives of so many people, just to be able to dictate your price.
That does not justify stealing my work and ruining my life and the lives of my fellow workers. If you don't want my software, my CD, or my DVD at the price that I set, then you can easily move on to my competition. If I charge too much, then that gives great incentive to my competitors to charge less, undercut me, and steal my customers.
The price of those goods pays my paycheck which feeds me, clothes me, and pays for my shelter. The price of those goods pays the paycheck for many, many of my coworkers in my community as well. I am not going to sacrifice myself nor my community to a thief like you.
You and people like you are ruining IT in America from attitudes like this.
Me: Frankly, it is not unreasonable to assume that someone out of the billion+ people living in China would buy a $10 CD if piracy was stamped out. Further, it is not unreasonable to assume that even a low percentage of those billion+ people living in China would buy a $10 CD if piracy was stamped out.
You: That is the problem. You want the world to suit your will. It just won't work. Even if you think what you want is 'moral'. It is not. It is greedy and control-freak-like.
Excuse me? Asking payment for my work is not "greedy" and "control-freak-like". That is the way the world operates and you are delusional to think otherwise.
You can not go into a grocery store, put food into your cart, and leave the store without paying. Complaining that the grocery store charges too much won't help you. Screaming about the "greedy" and "control-freak-like" cashiers won't help you. The cops will come, arrest you, and you will have to stand in front of a judge. At that point, I'd like to see how any of your agruments stand up.
You seem fixated on this "civilized world" comment. When people in China break their own IP laws in order to steal software, CD, and DVD content, then that is definition of uncivilized behavior. These actions are worsened by the corrupt authorities who look the other way, although they know that these pirates are breaking the law. Their whole society condones the breaking of their own laws. That certainly does not sound civilized to me.
Most people in the 'civilized world' might use something called a 'credit card' to buy stuff they are unable to afford. I dont think 'they merely walk by' is what happens.
Let me tell you a secret about credit cards... You have to pay them back. That's right! It's not free money. Companies do expect you to pay them back at some point.
And since those people can pay back those credit cards, then those same people can also afford those goods.
Your points are meaningless.
DVDs are the only media that wouldn't work in this example. Software and CDs both work perfectly.
Why would China enforce a law that would cause money to flow from China to US ? That would be a pretty stupid move from their part.
To join the WTO, China had to create IP laws in the first place. Were the US to bring a complaint to the WTO, then the Chinese would have to comply to remain a member and not receive sanctions. China will comply, if only to keep the rest of their economy running.
When most people in the civilized world see something they can't afford, they merely walk by and don't buy it. Those people then don't go running around, breaking the law to try to get it.
If you can't outright buy a DVD, then how about renting it like the rest of us. Certainly, the video rental stores have the money to purchase the newer DVDs. Even so, I myself certainly don't go out buying every DVD that I watch. Why should they have that right and I don't. Your justification is ridiculous.
So you agree that that the market isn't there.
That's not what I said at all. If you don't know the difference, then I suggest you take an economics class. You are obviously too dense to pick this up from a few readings on Slashdot.
The last I heard, there were no Chinese laws regarding foreign IP.
You need to look again. China joined the WTO in 2001. Before and since that time, they had to have these laws on the books. The problem is that China isn't enforcing their own laws.
The answer is to remain here in first place and keep our industry here rather than wasting resources chasing phantom losses claimed by businesses that are busy leaving the country while claiming they need protection.
Again, can you stick to the frickin topic. We're talking about the Chinese and the wholesale theft of software, CDs, and DVDs. We're not talking about how mean and big American corporations are.
I doubt you can speak for everyone in a country with a population over 1 billion people.
I would call myself self-sufficient. I make my own money and pay my own bills. At the end of the month, I definitely have extra left over. But if someone wants to give me a present, I accept it.
I guess then according to you, I wouldn't be self-sufficient.
So it's only about a level playing field for companies that create IP and not for companies that make textiles or garments or electronics? Where is your angst for them and the people they employed?
I fought that battle previously. If you actually subscribe to Slashdot, you can look up all my previous comments. Even so, you are again going off topic.
Tell that to the government and the SCOTUS after the recent eminent domain decision.
No where in the constitution does it set up capitalism as our economic system. Capitalism is a result of the choices that our federal and state legislatures made. SCOTUS turned over eminent domain decisions to local governments, which are now adjusting to the decision by enacting new laws to protect owners.
And again, you are going off topic.
You're saying that one person would have bought a legal copy if the Chinese weren't selling cracked copies on the street? Doesn't sound like much of a gain for American business to me.
The actual number is somewhere between one and the number of pirated copies. Given that we're talking about a billion+ people, it's likely more than a few would buy a legitimate copy. Even if the number is as low as 1% per month, that's 10,000,000 copies sold each month. That's hardly chump change and certainly more than the nothing we're selling now.
Me: And since someone would buy those CDs, DVDs, and software from US were they not being pirated, then it does affect the bottom line. Considering that we're talking about a country with over a billion people, it would affect the bottom line dramatically.
You: There are millions of Chinese who would love to own a Ford Explorer. They are very difficult to copy and sell on the street corner. I suggest you open a Ford dealership in China and make boatloads of money. Let me know how it works out.
Stick to the topic. We're talking CDs, DVDs, and software. A frickin car is a whole different ball game.
Even so, foreign companies are selling cars in China. Mercedes is just as much as status symbol there as it is here.