Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Anybody else think Goosemaster needs to back away from the computer and STFU?
Since when does one person's take on morality ring true for all?
Morality is a matter of perspective more than anything, and it is constantly up for debate. I agree, some arguments for morality are much clearer cut, and some are grayer (is murder moral vs. is jaywalking moral), but on the topic of file-sharing, I'd much rather debate how RIAA's actions will not stop (and only slightly slow) the growth of file-sharing.
Things are going to get much worse for RIAA as 1)broadband proliferates throughout the US, 2)new (more covert) methods of file sharing emerge, 3)globalizaton of the phenomenon will allow us to get free/cheap access to music from offshore sites (allofmp3 is a great example).
Some of you argue these lawsuits are necessary. I argue that RIAA already knows how pointless their legal efforts are in the long run, but they're out of options in trying to slow the growing number of traders.
I disagree. The lawsuits are meant as a deterrent. Once enough people know someone who has had to settle a lawsuit for several thousand dollars, people will be scared to share music for fear of a lawsuit. It became so popular because it was so easy to get away with. No one EVER got "caught." Maybe if they had started earlier, it wouldn't have gotten so big.
It seems like the RIAA can't do anything right with some people. They can't use copy protection, that punishes legitimate customers. They can't shut down the file sharing networks, people complain that the .0001% legal traffic warrants keeping them around. They can't file lawsuits and settle them for an order of magnitude LESS than they could win in court, that's heavy-handed. They can't use education campaigns, that's brainwashing. I'd love to know what WOULD be acceptable.
Originally posted by: Sunbird
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Anybody else think Goosemaster needs to back away from the computer and STFU?
Since when does one person's take on morality ring true for all?
Morality is a matter of perspective more than anything, and it is constantly up for debate. I agree, some arguments for morality are much clearer cut, and some are grayer (is murder moral vs. is jaywalking moral), but on the topic of file-sharing, I'd much rather debate how RIAA's actions will not stop (and only slightly slow) the growth of file-sharing.
Things are going to get much worse for RIAA as 1)broadband proliferates throughout the US, 2)new (more covert) methods of file sharing emerge, 3)globalizaton of the phenomenon will allow us to get free/cheap access to music from offshore sites (allofmp3 is a great example).
Some of you argue these lawsuits are necessary. I argue that RIAA already knows how pointless their legal efforts are in the long run, but they're out of options in trying to slow the growing number of traders.
I disagree. The lawsuits are meant as a deterrent. Once enough people know someone who has had to settle a lawsuit for several thousand dollars, people will be scared to share music for fear of a lawsuit. It became so popular because it was so easy to get away with. No one EVER got "caught." Maybe if they had started earlier, it wouldn't have gotten so big.
It seems like the RIAA can't do anything right with some people. They can't use copy protection, that punishes legitimate customers. They can't shut down the file sharing networks, people complain that the .0001% legal traffic warrants keeping them around. They can't file lawsuits and settle them for an order of magnitude LESS than they could win in court, that's heavy-handed. They can't use education campaigns, that's brainwashing. I'd love to know what WOULD be acceptable.
I don't know anyone who said that on here, they may advertise that copyright infringement is wrong as long as they have money to do it.
I don't think anyone could begrudge RIAA/MPAA that.
Originally posted by: Goosemaster
Originally posted by: Sunbird
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Anybody else think Goosemaster needs to back away from the computer and STFU?
Since when does one person's take on morality ring true for all?
Morality is a matter of perspective more than anything, and it is constantly up for debate. I agree, some arguments for morality are much clearer cut, and some are grayer (is murder moral vs. is jaywalking moral), but on the topic of file-sharing, I'd much rather debate how RIAA's actions will not stop (and only slightly slow) the growth of file-sharing.
Things are going to get much worse for RIAA as 1)broadband proliferates throughout the US, 2)new (more covert) methods of file sharing emerge, 3)globalizaton of the phenomenon will allow us to get free/cheap access to music from offshore sites (allofmp3 is a great example).
Some of you argue these lawsuits are necessary. I argue that RIAA already knows how pointless their legal efforts are in the long run, but they're out of options in trying to slow the growing number of traders.
I disagree. The lawsuits are meant as a deterrent. Once enough people know someone who has had to settle a lawsuit for several thousand dollars, people will be scared to share music for fear of a lawsuit. It became so popular because it was so easy to get away with. No one EVER got "caught." Maybe if they had started earlier, it wouldn't have gotten so big.
It seems like the RIAA can't do anything right with some people. They can't use copy protection, that punishes legitimate customers. They can't shut down the file sharing networks, people complain that the .0001% legal traffic warrants keeping them around. They can't file lawsuits and settle them for an order of magnitude LESS than they could win in court, that's heavy-handed. They can't use education campaigns, that's brainwashing. I'd love to know what WOULD be acceptable.
I don't know anyone who said that on here, they may advertise that copyright infringement is wrong as long as they have money to do it.
I don't think anyone could begrudge RIAA/MPAA that.
Ho many times have people critcized tehir "sharing music is wrong" commericals and campaigns?
Originally posted by: PHiuR
these kids were clueless when some kids on my floor went upstairs and downstairs to find them. My whole floor found out and checked our IP's no match...but we knew it was in our building. so some kids went upstairs and found one of the kids not knowing that his IP was on the list. he diddnt know what to do. so he came to G4...
Originally posted by: Sunbird
I don't know anyone who said that on here, they may advertise that copyright infringement is wrong as long as they have money to do it.
I don't think anyone could begrudge RIAA/MPAA that.
Originally posted by: RandomFool
RIT sent out an email about this a few weeks back saying that the RIAA contacted them and they wouldn't give out the info unless there was a court order or something. It was kinda scary, but It made me glad I moved off campus.
Piracy isn't going to stop no matter how many people they sue. I'm pretty sure the RIAA knows that and doesn't care. It's all about the money and trying to scare the normal person away from downloading. Hopefully someday they'll give up and go home.
Also, I'm almost positive that most people by now know it's wrong to download music, unless they've been living in a bubble without access to media. I still buy cds not as often because they're so damn expensive if prices were lower i'd buy more but they're not so i don't.
Originally posted by: RandomFool
RIT sent out an email about this a few weeks back saying that the RIAA contacted them and they wouldn't give out the info unless there was a court order or something. It was kinda scary, but It made me glad I moved off campus.
Piracy isn't going to stop no matter how many people they sue. I'm pretty sure the RIAA knows that and doesn't care. It's all about the money and trying to scare the normal person away from downloading. Hopefully someday they'll give up and go home.
Also, I'm almost positive that most people by now know it's wrong to download music, unless they've been living in a bubble without access to media. I still buy cds not as often because they're so damn expensive if prices were lower i'd buy more but they're not so i don't.
Originally posted by: aidanjm
it's time everyone jumped on the Tor band wagon!
Tor: An anonymous Internet communication system
Setting up Azureus to work with Tor
Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Oops! Maybe the RIAA will figure out sooner or later that people are going to continue to download regardless of how many people they file against. Maybe it's time to start blaming the current business model that causes the piracy instead of blaming the piracy...
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Oops! Maybe the RIAA will figure out sooner or later that people are going to continue to download regardless of how many people they file against. Maybe it's time to start blaming the current business model that causes the piracy instead of blaming the piracy...
They already sell single songs, and over the internet, too.
How else would they stop this? Give the music away?
That's about it. They'd have to give it away.
Music piracy is not about objections to business models. It is about a sense of entitlement and theft.
Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Oops! Maybe the RIAA will figure out sooner or later that people are going to continue to download regardless of how many people they file against. Maybe it's time to start blaming the current business model that causes the piracy instead of blaming the piracy...
They already sell single songs, and over the internet, too.
How else would they stop this? Give the music away?
That's about it. They'd have to give it away.
Music piracy is not about objections to business models. It is about a sense of entitlement and theft.
Nah, I disagree. When you're selling songs online for the same song/$ amount that you would for a CD then your model is messed up. Selling something over the internet that is in a digital format should not cost the same as walking into your local Best Buy and buying a hard copy.
Of course I haven't really looked into a lot of the more recent online outlets so perhaps the price structure has changed.
When you buy a CD, very little of the cost is to cover the CD. You are buying the rights to listen to material on the CD.
This is where your argument falls apart.
This is why downloading software usually costs nearly as much as buying the CD at the store.
So when you are buying a CD you are not paying for distribution/transportation costs? The cost of utilities at brick and mortar stores? Employees? Loss Prevention? Etc?
Originally posted by: rocadelpunk
sucks for those kids.
lesson be learned, listen to indie music that isn't on riaa watch list ; P
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: daniel1113
Originally posted by: mugs
You know absolutely nothing about copyright law, so stop pretending you do.
Actually, within that statement lies the problem. There are no set guidelines for this sort of thing. Copyright laws are vague, at best. Some serious reform is needed.
They're not vagued. Corporations can do what they want at will just as designed.
I'm always amazed when I see the quality of your posts next to the "Elite Member" title.
Originally posted by: rahvin
Personally I stopped buying CD's 10 years ago (except for some additions to my pink floyd collection). When Napster was at it's peak I used it to try to find new music that I liked but I didn't keep any of the songs and I don't download anything anymore.
The best protest isn't to steal the music, it's to stop buying it and stop listening to the new stuff. Only if everyone protests with their wallets or congress forces mandatory licensing will the situation change and really those are the only morally and legally viable positions in this debate. There is no justification for theft.
Originally posted by: Chaotic42
As someone who used to copy music left and right in my younger days, I have to admit that now that I'm an adult I realize that I'm not entitled to the music. If it's not good enough to buy, I just don't get the CD.
Originally posted by: JackBurton
Originally posted by: aidanjm
it's time everyone jumped on the Tor band wagon!
Tor: An anonymous Internet communication system
Setting up Azureus to work with Tor
SWEETNESS dude! SWEETNESS!