I bet you'd like to not get paid for anything your create, only for the busy work you do, because the stuff you create is worthless while the busy work you do is the real way people make money.
I bet you'd like if you couldn't copyright your song and make money off of it. I bet you'd like to run a company where you can do 20 years of research, come out with a product, and have a competitor take your design and copy it exactly, and have the same product out for 1/4 the price within 6 months.
I bet you'd actually care about outright plagiarism if you wrote a book, patents if you had any ideas, or copyrights if you owned the copyright to any software.
The reason why you don't care? You believe that you stand only to gain from IP being considered obsolete so every idea can be used freely by you.
People with your vantage point don't see that patents and copyrights are absolutely the only thing that make research and development useful to the individual. The corporation always stands to gain from efficiencies in manufacturing because they can lower costs, but there's nothing to gain in research without an exclusive right to use the technology for some period of time.
If nobody had exclusive rights to create something for a short period after it has been designed, whoever can make it the cheapest will always win - and that's not the USA because we have minimum standards of living and work environments much higher than those of nearly any other country.
If China can turn one gallon of fuel into a few hundred miles of transport per person, and we can only turn one gallon of fuel into twenty miles per person, guess who wins.
It depends on who can acquire more oil over the long term.
No there isn't. There's only one intellectual property being stolen in either case. Just like there's only one identity tied to the physical you.
"There's multiple copies of your social security number all over the place; I can just steal one since they're all over the place, and cost nothing to make another copy of, despite the identity linked to the SSN being devalued due to my irresponsible use of it."
They're both taking something intangible without permission and making the actual owner look bad. To not see the relationship is being blind to thought.
When the company has to come up with numbers for the shareholders to show the piracy rate, and you help make those numbers higher by pirating your copy, it's devaluing their assets.
When you decide to steal software (from a publicly traded company), you devalue the asset, which makes the company worth less on the market (especially since owning the copyright to said software IS their major asset). It's an extremely close situation to identity theft.
Piracy is stealing. Anyone who thinks not is a fucking retard.
"Identity theft isn't stealing, because I'm not actually depriving someone of something, just taking their intellectual property (identity) and using it."
The people in power here have forgotten that "free enterprise" and "free market" don't refer to "do anything you want". They forgot that the way we became powerful was by using regulation to harness the power of competition for our benefit; but that is no more.
If each side pushes further apart, the whole system will fall apart. Media companies need to make it quality, cheaper and DRM-free; pirates need to get over their righteousness and just buy the damn stuff when the companies do that.
Slashdot Mirror
I bet you'd like to not get paid for anything your create, only for the busy work you do, because the stuff you create is worthless while the busy work you do is the real way people make money.
I bet you'd like if you couldn't copyright your song and make money off of it. I bet you'd like to run a company where you can do 20 years of research, come out with a product, and have a competitor take your design and copy it exactly, and have the same product out for 1/4 the price within 6 months.
I bet you'd actually care about outright plagiarism if you wrote a book, patents if you had any ideas, or copyrights if you owned the copyright to any software.
The reason why you don't care? You believe that you stand only to gain from IP being considered obsolete so every idea can be used freely by you.
People with your vantage point don't see that patents and copyrights are absolutely the only thing that make research and development useful to the individual. The corporation always stands to gain from efficiencies in manufacturing because they can lower costs, but there's nothing to gain in research without an exclusive right to use the technology for some period of time.
If nobody had exclusive rights to create something for a short period after it has been designed, whoever can make it the cheapest will always win - and that's not the USA because we have minimum standards of living and work environments much higher than those of nearly any other country.
You're taking intellectual property, as evidenced by the copyright present on every game.
Game, set, match.
No, it isn't. Look at definition 1B:
an unlawful taking (as by embezzlement or burglary) of property
Nowhere does it mention the "intent to deprive" everyone here keeps talking about.
If China can turn one gallon of fuel into a few hundred miles of transport per person, and we can only turn one gallon of fuel into twenty miles per person, guess who wins.
It depends on who can acquire more oil over the long term.
By pirating your copy, you increased their estimated number from 9990 to 10,000 , and thus devalued their asset.
No there isn't. There's only one intellectual property being stolen in either case. Just like there's only one identity tied to the physical you.
"There's multiple copies of your social security number all over the place; I can just steal one since they're all over the place, and cost nothing to make another copy of, despite the identity linked to the SSN being devalued due to my irresponsible use of it."
They're both taking something intangible without permission and making the actual owner look bad. To not see the relationship is being blind to thought.
When the company has to come up with numbers for the shareholders to show the piracy rate, and you help make those numbers higher by pirating your copy, it's devaluing their assets.
You fail. Completely.
When you decide to steal software (from a publicly traded company), you devalue the asset, which makes the company worth less on the market (especially since owning the copyright to said software IS their major asset). It's an extremely close situation to identity theft.
Piracy is stealing. Anyone who thinks not is a fucking retard.
"Identity theft isn't stealing, because I'm not actually depriving someone of something, just taking their intellectual property (identity) and using it."
You can pick places where that isn't a problem.
As I said, they need to be properly isolated, which they currently don't seem to be.
That's why I said "are properly isolated", since I'm fairly sure they aren't at this point.
No, because the two "masters" exchange blows with each other when the system is properly run and the entities are properly isolated.
The government is the balance to a corporate system, and both together provide fairness. Get with it, man.
It's not a technology issue, just like every other damned time. It's the way its used and regulated.
The people in power here have forgotten that "free enterprise" and "free market" don't refer to "do anything you want". They forgot that the way we became powerful was by using regulation to harness the power of competition for our benefit; but that is no more.
Do you suggest he read it?
Not to their biological parents.
It's only 1 ISP, so you could just switch now and avoid the hassle, if Ireland has multiple options in those areas.
If each side pushes further apart, the whole system will fall apart. Media companies need to make it quality, cheaper and DRM-free; pirates need to get over their righteousness and just buy the damn stuff when the companies do that.
It's also illegal in some places for anyone to carry tasers, for cops and citizens alike.
New Jersey: The Land of Common Sense (In this particular case)
If by "communist" you mean "totalitarian under the guise of communism", then yes, they are communist.
If it's the only common thread between the employees, then it makes sense to connect those dots.
Unions push for the laws that protect workers. Without a unified voice, the workers will be drowned out by the big voice that is the corporation.