Visit the Ironworks Gaming Website Email the Webmaster Graphics Library Rules and Regulations Help Support Ironworks Forum with a Donation to Keep us Online - We rely totally on Donations from members Donation goal Meter

Ironworks Gaming Radio

Ironworks Gaming Forum

Go Back   Ironworks Gaming Forum > Ironworks Gaming Forums > General Discussion > General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-10-2003, 12:43 PM   #31
Calaethis Dragonsbane
Legion Symbol
 

Join Date: May 29, 2002
Location: Somewhere in between
Age: 39
Posts: 7,029
Quote:
Originally posted by Luvian:
Probably nopt, but I guess they could arrest you if you visit the USA.
Hmm, interesting. I wonder exactly what internet laws apply to whom. And if the US has any rights over other countries.
Calaethis Dragonsbane is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 12:48 PM   #32
Timber Loftis
40th Level Warrior
 

Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
Quote:
Originally posted by Luvian:
quote:
Originally posted by Calaethis Dragonsbane:
I'm wondering something. Does the RIAA have any juristiction OUTSIDE the USA? I'm not going to state my views on this thing; but I'm just curious to know if they do have the right to arrest non-US citizens in other countries.
Probably nopt, but I guess they could arrest you if you visit the USA. [/QUOTE]Yes, likely they do. I bet some of their lawsuits are or will be against non-nationals. They certainly go through the trouble of obtaining foreign intellectual property rights.

Generally speaking, if your website is viewed in Nebraska and violates Nebraska law, you can be hailed into court in NB. Conversely if you are in NB and use a website to steal from a guy in Canada, he can sue you for it.

If RIAA didn't want to trouble of the jurisdictional fight -- service of process could be a big problem, and there WOULD be an objection -- it could simply sue in the foreign country.

[ 09-10-2003, 12:51 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]
__________________
Timber Loftis is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 12:51 PM   #33
Bungleau
40th Level Warrior
 

Join Date: October 29, 2001
Location: Western Wilds of Michigan
Posts: 11,752
My general take: theft is wrong. Taking something without permission, taking something without paying... it's wrong. Stealing songs over the 'net is still wrong.

Some may argue that the recording industry charges too much. Last I heard, charging what the market will bear is called capitalism. It's pretty effective. The market responding to your price by not buying... that's called capitalism too, or perhaps economics. Supply and demand. It's also pretty effective until someone artificially shifts it with floors and ceilings, but that's another topic.

These are two separate issues. Theft is not capitalism; capitalism is not theft.

There are grey areas. If I develop a drug that cures cancer, should I sell it for your life's savings? It's probably worth that much to you, but is it morally or ethically right for me to do so? Perhaps not. But there are a number of ways of looking at it, and most of them are justifiable. How much profit am I allowed to make? And who determines how much I should be able to make? If I charge too much, someone else will come in to take advantage of a lower profit margin. That's called capitalism at work, folks, and it's pretty effective until someone monkeys around with it.

With prices where they have been, I think I've only bought one new CD over the past three years. Any others have been picked up in discount bins, special sales, or received as gifts. I ask myself if this particular artist's CD is worth $19 to me... and in rare cases, it is. Most times, it's not, and I'll wait until it's cheaper. I've replaced some of my albums with CDs, but not all; the others aren't quite as valuable to me (certainly not $18-$19 valuable).

As a consumer, I've said the prices are too high, and I won't buy. The record industry "suffers", or loses my business, because of it. Will I buy more now? Perhaps, perhaps not. I'm more likely to, but it's not guaranteed. They've trained me to question my purchases.

Has the industry been greedy? Maybe, maybe not. Nothing wrong with charging what the market will bear.

Has the industry been behind the times? Yessiree, it has. New products, such as CD singles (which aren't new), would address the "I only want one or two songs" crowd. Hey, it used to work back with 45s...

Have people found other ways to get music? Yes.

Have they all been legal? No. Does the industry's pricing justify illegal behavior? No. Clearly and undeniably, no.

Sorry, but if you think you can justify stealing songs, then you justify me coming over, opening your wallet or purse, and taking out all your money. Why should you have that money and not me? Is it fair? Same principle, isn't it?

Theft is wrong. It's that simple.
__________________
*B*
Save Early, Save Often Save Before, Save After
Two-Star General, Spelling Soldiers
-+-+-+
Give 'em a hug one more time. It might be the last.
Bungleau is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 12:53 PM   #34
harleyquinn
Symbol of Cyric
 

Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: NY
Age: 48
Posts: 1,190
Quote:
Originally posted by Faceman:
Now people go easy on Chewbacca. It's not his fault the RIAA is sueing a 12-year old
He lost his job and that is bad enough. Why his store went down I can't say. But I can't blame him for being mad at people who get for free what he used to sell and then sticking it to him.

+ The often heard argument of car theft is not valid because you aren't actually "stealing" something concrete (which would involve the victim to lose it) but copying and idea. More like stealing the car's plans and building it on your own (with all the resources provided for free however [img]smile.gif[/img] ).
+ copyright laws the way they are used nowadays are flawed. By purchasing a CD you are actually purchasing the right to listen to a song whenever you want to. But what if a song is stuck in your head and you haven't purchased it? (a bit extreme I know). What about taping a song from the radio or taping a movie on TV.
I like to watch US sitcoms and other TV shows and for that purpose download them from P2P. I get them one year earlier than they air here (if they do) and in original language. Is this illegal? I'm not sure. There are season DVDs out for purchasing but why am I any different from the people who tape every episode on their VCR? Or why different from the people that borrow that tapes and copy them for themselves?
The P2P issue only demonstrates the problems copyright law always had but which never showed. If you only lend the CD to a friend to let him tape it it is overlooked but once everyone becomes everyone's friend over the web it becomes a problem. If someone hosts a song he owns (owns the CD) on his webpage to play it to visitors (streaming of course) it's much like if a friend plays me a CD when I visit him. However here it is illegal because the song lands on my hard-drive (which is just my extended brain in that case [img]smile.gif[/img] )
and so on...

There is need of a re-evaluation of copyright laws and a lot of clearing up to do (and I do NOT necessarily mean that everything should be free immediately; this has to be found out in a proper judical, philosophical and sociological discussion and not only founded on one sides opinion).
Faceman, ask a musician who writes his songs if he thinks that it's just an idean, not a thing. You are stealing something that someone worked hard to create, it's no different than a painting. You have no more right to steal someone's songs than you do to steal that painting. You're not "building the song" on it's own. You may be "building the CD", but not the song, sung by that artist, which is what they are suing for. You are stealing their work and not paying them (the artists) what is do them for their creation.
__________________
[img]\"http://www.bethspage.us/sig.jpg\" alt=\" - \" />
harleyquinn is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 12:57 PM   #35
NewbietoRPGs
Drow Warrior
 

Join Date: January 3, 2003
Location: Connecticut
Age: 50
Posts: 264
Quote:
Originally posted by Bungleau:
My general take: theft is wrong. Taking something without permission, taking something without paying... it's wrong. Stealing songs over the 'net is still wrong.

Some may argue that the recording industry charges too much. Last I heard, charging what the market will bear is called capitalism. It's pretty effective. The market responding to your price by not buying... that's called capitalism too, or perhaps economics. Supply and demand. It's also pretty effective until someone artificially shifts it with floors and ceilings, but that's another topic.

These are two separate issues. Theft is not capitalism; capitalism is not theft.

There are grey areas. If I develop a drug that cures cancer, should I sell it for your life's savings? It's probably worth that much to you, but is it morally or ethically right for me to do so? Perhaps not. But there are a number of ways of looking at it, and most of them are justifiable. How much profit am I allowed to make? And who determines how much I should be able to make? If I charge too much, someone else will come in to take advantage of a lower profit margin. That's called capitalism at work, folks, and it's pretty effective until someone monkeys around with it.

With prices where they have been, I think I've only bought one new CD over the past three years. Any others have been picked up in discount bins, special sales, or received as gifts. I ask myself if this particular artist's CD is worth $19 to me... and in rare cases, it is. Most times, it's not, and I'll wait until it's cheaper. I've replaced some of my albums with CDs, but not all; the others aren't quite as valuable to me (certainly not $18-$19 valuable).

As a consumer, I've said the prices are too high, and I won't buy. The record industry "suffers", or loses my business, because of it. Will I buy more now? Perhaps, perhaps not. I'm more likely to, but it's not guaranteed. They've trained me to question my purchases.

Has the industry been greedy? Maybe, maybe not. Nothing wrong with charging what the market will bear.

Has the industry been behind the times? Yessiree, it has. New products, such as CD singles (which aren't new), would address the "I only want one or two songs" crowd. Hey, it used to work back with 45s...

Have people found other ways to get music? Yes.

Have they all been legal? No. Does the industry's pricing justify illegal behavior? No. Clearly and undeniably, no.

Sorry, but if you think you can justify stealing songs, then you justify me coming over, opening your wallet or purse, and taking out all your money. Why should you have that money and not me? Is it fair? Same principle, isn't it?

Theft is wrong. It's that simple.
You hit the nail right on the head Bungleau!!!
NewbietoRPGs is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 01:22 PM   #36
Timber Loftis
40th Level Warrior
 

Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
Look, I agree theft is generally wrong. I know I've put out arguments that we SHOULD steal from big companies -- but those come from my Tyler Durdin side that also wants to blow up all the credit card company records rooms and terminals so we can "set the debt record back to 0" -- so I'll shelve them for now.

But, allow me to REALLY rankle your feathers. Okay, RIAA is suing folks who steal. Fine.

However, they are also going around snooping on counterfeit CD sellers. MY wife has a few RIAA trials today. You see, they hire snoopers to go out and find eeevil folks selling fake CDs around town, then they call the cops and report the crime. Cops come and arrest the guy for theft/copyright violations. RIAA then hands prosecutors, like my wife, a primer on "why counterfeit CDs are bad, mkay." Then, they insist (as the complaining witness) on guilty verdicts. You can plead the case out, but you are going to plead guilty or RIAA's lawyer (who is there observing/assisting *wink wink* prosecutors on the case) will try to force the prosecutor to push it to trial.

So, I'm sitting here reading a RIAA theft pamphlet and legal primer last night when the problem with all this hits me. They are doing this on my tax dollar. My wife's salary as a State's Attorney is paid by the good citizens of the state. The cops who make the arrest, the people who process the whole thing, the judge, even the defense attorney (public defender) are paid for by ME.

Well, let's say I was a tad [img]graemlins/1pissed.gif[/img] bit angry about that. Now, I know that theft is a crime, but c'mon -- my wife's court has 30-50 RIAA cases awaiting trial right now. That's a lot of tax dollars. [img]graemlins/erm.gif[/img]

While you can report a crime, and theft is a crime, a megacorp hiring nanny-snoopers to go investigating the streets of the town and yell "Hey, meester officer, over here -- look! -- a crime in progress!" and then having the megacorp attorney sit as an overseer educating prosecutors and insisting they push hard -- well, that's corporate welfare and/or oversight of our government isn't it??

Look, go sue little Suzy K. Za all you want. But, please quit enforcing your multimillion dollar copyrights on my tax dime, thank you.

One last point on RIAA enforcement: didn't they go around suing all restaurants that played CD/tape music for their diners without paying for the RIAA licenses to publicly perform music? Wasn't that an attempt to force small restauranteurs around the country to have the RIAA music piped in?

[ 09-10-2003, 01:26 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]
__________________
Timber Loftis is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 01:23 PM   #37
Luvian
Ironworks Moderator
 

Join Date: June 27, 2001
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Age: 42
Posts: 6,763
Quote:
Originally posted by Bungleau:
Sorry, but if you think you can justify stealing songs, then you justify me coming over, opening your wallet or purse, and taking out all your money. Why should you have that money and not me? Is it fair? Same principle, isn't it?

Theft is wrong. It's that simple.
There is a huge difference, and it's the reason so much people don't mind digital piracy.

If you take money out of my wallet, or take my car, then I lost something, even if you had no intention to buy a car in the first place.

But if you come over to my house, scan the cash in my wallet and then print it, then I lost nothing. If you also manage to "scan" and "print" my car, then good for you, and I lost nothing. If you make a copy of the monalisa, then good for you, and the original is still in the museum, so good for them, too.

Now if you were planing on buying those, but didn't because you got them for free, then yes, you did hurt the people who made them, by denying themy our money. If you had no intention of buying them, but made a copy because you could, then the makers didn't lose anything, since they would not have gotten your money otherwise. Now, if you start making multiple copies and selling them, then you are hurting the makers, as you are denying other people's money, as they were willing to pay for it, but paid you instead.

This is the reason so much people justify digital piracy as ok. As long as they don't sell it and had no intention to buy it, they are hurting no one, as they aren't removing anything from anyone, and they are denying no one their money, as they had no intention to buy it in the first place.

As long as the opponent to digital piracy fail to aknowledge this, there will never be any real progress made in the fight against piracy. It's like trying to fight AIDS, but without admitting people are having sex. It just won't work.

Digital piracy is now a part of our society just like using drug is. The only way to make things change is by sencibilisation. Unless you are willing to put in jail millions of people. You can't stop piracy by telling people "piracy is bad" just as you can't stop drug using by saying "drug is bad".

[ 09-10-2003, 01:30 PM: Message edited by: Luvian ]
__________________
Once upon a time in Canada...
Luvian is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 01:24 PM   #38
Larry_OHF
Ironworks Moderator
 

Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: Midlands, South Carolina
Age: 48
Posts: 14,759
FYI...I learned long ago to not waste money in buying tapes or CDs because the "1" song that I liked from a particular group would be the "1" song I'd listen to, after paying an enormous price...and then in a month, I was tired of that song because there was a better one out from another group.

I am quite sure that this will not improve sells of CDs.

Anyway, after this becomes old news, the next thing you will be hearing is a nation-wide requirement to RIP OUT ALL RECORD BUTTONS ON ANY STEREO THAT RECEIVES FM BROADCASTS...because people are recording stuff off the radio and have been BEFORE the internet was invented.

Now don't that sound silly?
__________________
Larry_OHF is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 01:27 PM   #39
Chewbacca
Zartan
 

Join Date: July 18, 2001
Location: America, On The Beautiful Earth
Age: 50
Posts: 5,373
The point I was previously trying to make is that the livelyhood
of people who's passion and career is centered around the lawful capitalistic distribution of music is also being stolen. I considered myself a spokesperson for artists and their work. I loved asking people ( my customers) about their tastes in music, talking up a new album by a favorite artist, or turning them on to a similiar artist(s). I loved hiring people for my staff that shared that same passion and love for music.

I am musician. I sing, rap, write songs, play bass, percussion and keys. Although my store also sold movies and video games, the music aspect was my favorite and was the core business. I love music. It is a huge part of my life that I feel like I recently lost a part of. Boo freakin hoo... [img]graemlins/finger2.gif[/img]


I hate shoplifters and pursued them to no end, for there is no doubt that theft adds a remarkable burden on any retail industry that has tight profit margins and raises the price of every legitimate customer. A store must sell 18 CDs to make up for the loss of one. I see illegal file-sharing, bootlegging, piracy, and counterfeiting as the equivalent as shoplifting, only en masse.

A 25-40% decrease in same store CD sales in the span of two years is remarkable in an industry that only saw steady growth for the 12 years previous. It is no wonder that out of the 800 or so stores in my previous company less than 20 were profitable last year and 1/5 of them closed. Two other music chains have gone bankrupt. The total victims though are the small indie retailers that dont have huge lines of corporate assets and lines of credit to fall back on. Im not predicting doom, the doom has happened and is happening now.

No wonder that finally the stupid labels have started lowering their prices. They are losing outlets for their goods at an alarming rate. They had no choice and it angers me to no end they didn't make this move a long long time ago.

While I think it is ridiculous that a 12 year old girl is being sued by the RIAA, ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law and her parent(s) should have made sure of what they paid for and insured that their child was walking on the up and up.

People who fileshare and otherwise break the law with regards to copyright infringment should be made well aware of the consequences of their actions.

So go ahead ya'll and boo hoo me all you want, BRING EM ON!!!
When your ship goes down I will try not to gloat.
__________________
Support Local Music and Record Stores!
Got Liberty?
Chewbacca is offline  
Old 09-10-2003, 01:41 PM   #40
Luvian
Ironworks Moderator
 

Join Date: June 27, 2001
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Age: 42
Posts: 6,763
Quote:
Originally posted by Chewbacca:
A 25-40% decrease in same store CD sales in the span of two years is remarkable in an industry that only saw steady growth for the 12 years previous. It is no wonder that out of the 800 or so stores in my previous company less than 20 were profitable last year and 1/5 of them closed. Two other music chains have gone bankrupt. The total victims though are the small indie retailers that dont have huge lines of corporate assets and lines of credit to fall back on. Im not predicting doom, the doom has happened and is happening now.
I sympathize with you on your problems, but what proof do you have this loss is related to piracy, and not to people getting fed up with the high prices and other abuses by the music industry?

Just look in this thread for example. Almost everyone, including people against piracy, said they are tired of the music industry and it's abuse and are buying less.

Don't you think the music industry is blaming piracy for it just an excuse to cover up the fact that people are tired of the crap and buying less?

And what do you think of my latest post, which explain the point of view of digital pirates?

[ 09-10-2003, 01:44 PM: Message edited by: Luvian ]
__________________
Once upon a time in Canada...
Luvian is offline  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
anyone 50 year old girl free for a couple of months? Harkoliar General Discussion 5 10-20-2006 06:57 PM
Is forcing a 13-year old girl to give birth immoral? shamrock_uk General Discussion 29 05-03-2005 06:46 PM
yes, a 5 year old girl was found today..... gaunty General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 32 07-20-2002 10:59 AM
Get well soon Reeka, and anybody who sees this had better post jabidas General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 42 12-09-2001 12:04 AM
Forum or face to face? Which is more informative? Ronn_Bman General Discussion 8 11-01-2001 05:22 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2024 Ironworks Gaming & ©2024 The Great Escape Studios TM - All Rights Reserved