kazaa? Morhpeous? e-mule?...

[WillowIX]

Originally posted by FelixJaeger: Willow you seem to have neglected the fact that I said I buy the albums, how else am I supposed to pay them? Give all of my spare money to the bands I like even though most of them make more money in one week than I have seen in my entire life? So? Read your own post again. You said you payed through your connection fees. You don´t! And if you buy the albums afterwards, then [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] to you. And no it's not a bad analogy, its just very extreme, but if I was offended easily, I may have gone and killed myself, you don't know my state of mind and then to be called that by a stranger could push someone too far. Hell i've been in too many fights and arguments for being called a thief when i'm not(even with teachers which means i lose automatically )I think you are missing the point. If someone downloads music fro the net via file sharing software he/she is a thief. Thief - One who takes portable property from another without the knowledge or consent of the latter, converting it to his own use; one who steals. Since one downloads music without the knowledge and consent of the owner, how does this not make him/her a thief?

[ 05-08-2003, 03:45 PM: Message edited by: WillowIX ]

[Timber Loftis]

[img]graemlins/readingbook.gif[/img] Pointy-headed note: Once you have bought a piece of copyrighted material, you may copy it for your own use. Thus, you may photocopy your books and burn your CD's all you like once you have paid for them (for your own use -- you cannot sell or trade them). Many songs are available legally for free online. They are put out by the artists and the radio stations -- these are also fair game.

The reason software co's license their material is that you do not *own* a licensed CD's contents -- you merely own the right to use the program. This makes it illegal for you to burn your software CD's, because the law of "license" is different than that of "copyright."

[FelixJaeger]

Right, ways how I pay for music, my connection costs me money, and I then download music to sample it and see if I like it, thus it is costing me money. My mother pays for Sky TV which has music channels which is another way I can tell I like a band or not. Do they not get a share in this?
So if you have ever had a virus on your computer, you have taken it from another, and the original creator is unlikely to know about you having it, thus you are a thief? I believe you have a slightly warped idea of the way calling someone a thief works. From what you said I just made anyone with a computer almost a thief.
So? I've seen a lot of money in my life, if these starving artists want any more money than they already have then they are no better than football players, can somebody not be content with being rich and famous without becoming stupidly rich taking every penny they can get?
Thank god you didnt bring up the analogy again I hate explaining those.
Felix
p.s. this is a good argument.

[Night Stalker]

Felix ... the money you pay for you internet connection is just that - a connection fee. You a paying for bandwidth and the ability to connect, nothing more. Any other services you wish to access are at the discression of the providers of those services. They may choose to charge you or not, or allow/deny access to you.

The model of radio and MTV like channels don't apply. They already pay the content providers for the right to distribute the works.

Computer viruses also don't fit your analogy, as the author intends wide distribution of the virulent code.

Finaly, in a capitolist market, it is not the consumer that tells the provider how much is enough. The provider determines that for him/herself.

[andrewas]

Originally posted by FelixJaeger: Right, ways how I pay for music, my connection costs me money, and I then download music to sample it and see if I like it, thus it is costing me money. My mother pays for Sky TV which has music channels which is another way I can tell I like a band or not. Do they not get a share in this?

Royalities. They get paid when a radio station or TV station uses their music, they dont get paid when someone uses Kazaa to listen to the music. They also get paid for internet radio, and any other form of legitimate broadcast/distribution.

So if you have ever had a virus on your computer, you have taken it from another, and the original creator is unlikely to know about you having it, thus you are a thief? I believe you have a slightly warped idea of the way calling someone a thief works. From what you said I just made anyone with a computer almost a thief.

Viruses are freeware. They are released into the public domain, the virus author does not desire to make a profit from sales of the virus. They are not stolen, they are given.

So? I've seen a lot of money in my life, if these starving artists want any more money than they already have then they are no better than football players, can somebody not be content with being rich and famous without becoming stupidly rich taking every penny they can get?

Replace "artist" with "distibutor" and I would tend to agree with you. However, you are aquiring a product which is not (usualy, there are exceptions) in the public domain and which is licensed to an artist and his distributors. You are not making a payment to either the artist or the distributor for this product, and therefore you do not have the right to play the music. In the purely technical sense, at the least, you are a thief. Of course, I doubt any of them would hold it against you if you bought the music a day or so later, but if you decide you dont like it you dont buy it and that is definately theft.

Thank god you didnt bring up the analogy again I hate explaining those. Felix p.s. this is a good argument.

[Sir Krustin]

I'm into this a little late (troubles with my browser, and a Volcano 9 cooling fan later...) but my favourite p2p medium right now is IRC, currently using the mIRC client under winblows.

Combine the ability to converse in different public "channels" plus private chat modes and DCC (direct client-2-client) connections as well as scripting and file servers and you have a truly powerful and flexible means of communicating in real-time.

My favourite activity right now is finding fansubbing groups that translate foreign material that hasn't been introduced into North America. This is technically illegal, but the producers tend to wink at it because it provides a LOT of publicity for their product; in fact the current large Anime market is largely a product of the fansubbing phenomenon.

Of course, the responsible fansubbers cheer when a product they've translated comes to market and promptly remove their stuff from the internet.