What's your stand on pirating?

[MidasGirl]

Personally, I think it's stealing. And I think it comes from a low consciousness mentality.


The arguments I've heard in defense:

--The big movie houses will always make beaucoup bucks regardless

--Even if I stop doing it, this is so widespread it doesn't help anything

--I don't steal from the indie creators, just the big guys


etc etc.


What do you think? Is it stealing.....or do you put it on a lesser scale than say, robbing a bank? And why?

[Daffy Duck]

Yes, it is stealing, though I consider it a minor crime.

No, it's not the same as robbing a bank. Most new movies can be rented for $1 from Redbox, so downloading something worth $1 is very different than robbing a bank of thousands of dollars. Movies are so cheap nowadays they're practically free.

The movie business is changing. People want movies cheap and easy. Stores like Blockbuster are losing in popularity to services like Redbox or Netflix. Digital media is the future.

Digital stuff is getting cheaper or free. Expensive software now has open source free alternatives. Can't afford Adobe Photoshop? No problem -- just use one of the dozens of great free alternatives.

[Jamie]

What happens when you're pirating something that some little guy (not big business) has made, something they've put a lot of creative energy and time in to; and it's their only source of income, and they need to eat and feed their families like everyone else..

Is that different to pirating something put out by some mega-corporation?

[Daffy Duck]

I guess that's the similar to asking, "Which is worse? If I lightly slap 100 people, or really kick one person hard in the face?"

Either way, the same amount of goods (one movie) is being taken. Maybe a mega-corporation could handle the blow a bit better.

[Brutha]

Copyright infringement isn't anymore stealing than defamation is stealing.

Copyright is a privilege that's given out by states to reward creative people.
It isn't less but it also isn't more.

[seeker5]

In my personal life, I don't have a problem with downloading pirated music or watching copied DVDs, or copying songs from others to put on my iPod.

I understand and respect why some people consider it as stealing. I just don't consider it as stealing myself.

[themaster]

What's your stand on pirating?

I don't have a stance.. I think everyone should stop trying to mind everyone else's business.. in short.. just stop judging!

In truth I'm a massive pirate rarely have I ever paid for anything..

According to my teacher by the magic power of reflection (aka LOA) this makes you "low consciousness mentality." I would again suggest the idea MidasGirl of not judging..

[YourHumbleNarrator]

My perspective has evolved over the years. On a general level, it comes down to whether or not you view the institution of copyrights as valid. If you disacknowledge its authority then you're not taking anything; you're enjoying and using art as you see fit. The way I see it, the soundest argument is against taking what someone else has created and selling it without giving them anything in return. Of course, if you don't acknowledge copyright, you could say you're not a thief, you're an entrepreneur taking advantage of an opportunity.

I don't like fixed morals. I like principles. As a matter of principle, I don't have a problem with downloading movies or music or what have you regardless of who produces it. The media itself is worthless in the digital age. You can put it on a hard drive and distribute it en masse for pennies on the dollar. However, when something moves me, I want the creator to benefit. "Your work has fundamentally changed my life so I'm gonna help put food on your table. Or hell, if you got plenty of that, why not get that car you've been eying?" I make an exception for anything that comes from a major music label or movie studio. I despise the way the big corporations do business; piracy wouldn't be the problem that it is if they had chosen to evolve with technology instead of fighting it each step of the way. Sure, we can (finally) buy DRM-free MP3s of decent quality on Amazon, but it's too little too late.

I download stuff because it's easy and I enjoy what I get. I also expose myself to lots of new things I might otherwise overlook if I had to pay for it. One of my favorite bands, Electric Six, wouldn't have come to my attention if I hadn't downloaded their albums, yet because I did I paid for their latest CD, I went to see them in concert, and I bought a t-shirt. This is partly why I think the whole piracy thing is overstated. People who listen or watch without ever giving a dime to the creators probably weren't going to pay them anyways.

In terms of copyright law, I don't think it should be abolished but it should be redefined within limited parameters. The creative commons license is a good example-you're free to share and distribute a work so long as you don't make a profit and you don't claim it as your own. That's all a copyright should be.

As an aside, these are two really good links on the subject:
demonbaby: When Pigs Fly: The Death of Oink, the Birth of Dissent, and a Brief History of Record Industry Suicide.
The Lew Rockwell Show - 131. Stephan Kinsella: The Intellectual Property Racket

[Daffy Duck]

I pirate sometimes, particularly with music, but I still consider it stealing. I'm secretly taking something that wasn't intended to be free. The creators make no profit, just like if everyone were to download Steve's book instead of buying it. So although it's not stealing in the most common sense, I'm still breaking this sort of agreement with the creators of the material.

I can just imagine someone spending years programming the perfect software for some task, and then being "rewarded" with rampant piracy of it. It just doesn't seem right, ultimately.

[Trezker]

Copyright infringement is certainly wrong. The rights holders has decided they want to be paid and we don't have the right to just parttake in their creation unless we present them with riches.

But I haven't chosen not to pirate because they don't want me to. I have chosen not to pirate, because I don't want to give them any attention as long as they are working hard to undermine our democracy and human rights.

Instead of getting mainstream culture, I'm looking for artists who are trying new business models and try to give them more attention. If enough people stop pirating, and start downloading from rights holders who doesn't want to obliterate your right to privacy. Maybe some day the big companies will stop behaving like a Mafia.

That said. I'm really itching to see some new movies. But my morals don't allow me to see those movies in any way. Doesn't matter if I pay or not, I'll still feel guilty if I see them.

[Mogget]

At the start of DVD's there's a little trailer/ad that Says "You wouldn't steal a car.... piracy is theft" and every time I think "If I could download a copy of a car HECK yeah I would....."

[nin64]

let's face it, we will make less garbage by piracy.

[silicon toad2000]

I download movies and have some pirated software.

My stance is that you can hear music on the radio to decide if you like it, you can take cars for test drives, you even get some free sample foods to decide if you like it in some shops. With movies you're stuck. They put the few good bits in the trailer and the rest is rubbish. I download movies to watch and then delete them. If they're good enough to watch again ill go to the drive ins / cinema or buy the dvd. I have an extensive dvd colection of purchased dvd's.
I own a copy of windows. The purchased copy I have doesn't perform as well as my hacked copy so I use the hacked copy on my computers and I use linux. I even paid for a book on linux from the creators of the distribution i use.

Basically if you use it/listen to it/watch it after the first time, return something to the creators to represent the enjoyment/utility you derived from it. If it's overpriced, download the album and buy the single, donate to software designers, just make sure there is some give or take.

[Aleksander Krstic]

I think it's stealing, but it's not as terrible as bank robbery like Daffy said.

Personally I have eliminated all piracy content out of my life.

[Chris_1977]

Unauthorized sharing (for reasons of propaganda also known as "piracy") is, as far as I know, inevitable at the moment. I will stop doing it if all of the conditions below are met
* there exists a website where I can buy in digital non-DRMed format what I want to have;
* the prices on said site are reasonable;
* I can use said site from my country;
* I can access said site without installing programs that do not run on my computer;
* I do not have to enter into any subscriptions that I do not want before buying on said site;
* I am reasonably sure that said site is actually related to the artists that produced the art that I want to buy and some percentage of the money that I pay actually ends up with them;
* I am reasonably sure that my credit card number will not end up in the hands of the Russian maffia after having used said site.

Actually, these demands are completely reasonable and I think that as long as they are not met the record companies and movie companies are the only ones to blame if I engage in unauthorized sharing.

[YourHumbleNarrator]

Originally Posted by Trezker

Instead of getting mainstream culture, I'm looking for artists who are trying new business models and try to give them more attention. If enough people stop pirating, and start downloading from rights holders who doesn't want to obliterate your right to privacy. Maybe some day the big companies will stop behaving like a Mafia.

1. Where there are people bent on restricting rights, there will be people to counter them. And the so-called pirates have them by the throat; big business can't win this battle. If file-sharers did stop sharing material the RIAA and MPAA own the rights to, they'd still act like a mafia. They'd need someone to blame and "pirates" would still be the most convenient target. This is what they do; they use the law to create legal monopolies and restrict rights. They don't know anything else and they won't do anything else. That's why they need to go.

2. It's reasonable to assume they aren't mad because of what they've "lost" to piracy, they're mad because people don't want what they sell anymore. The fact that a movie like "The Dark Knight" grossed a billion worldwide shows that people will still pay for quality content in a traditional format, but most of what's out there is not on that level.

It's impossible for everything they put out to be an original masterpiece, but from the 80s onward we've been inundated by mindless action and talking animals. Music got stale and repetitive nearing the end of the 90s. Now all that's on the radio is cookie-cutter music designed from the ground up to duplicate money-making formulas. Art cannot be produced through formulas and still retain the aspects that make it appealing.

Furthermore, the advent of the internet exposed people to music they wouldn't have heard otherwise. Many have grown to love music that used to be obscure, and they're scouring for even more eclectic material. The days of mega-hit singles aren't over, but songs with mass appeal and artistic merit are few, if not non-existent, at this time.

I don't have many RIAA songs on my computer, and I bought most of them before I boycotted the major labels. That's the case with many professed "pirates." If the industry gave us more Queens and fewer Nickelbacks, that'd be a mark in their favor. They don't, and if they don't provide compelling content they shouldn't expect anybody to pay for it.

[YourHumbleNarrator]

Originally Posted by Chris_1977

Actually, these demands are completely reasonable and I think that as long as they are not met the record companies and movie companies are the only ones to blame if I engage in unauthorized sharing.

I've always thought that the smartest move on their part would have been to create a subscription music service around the time Napster was popular. $20 dollars a month for unlimited downloads. There would be ads on the site and that's how bands would be paid royalties, and page hits would determine which bands the record companies would promote. Ideally they'd combine this with a social networking structure similar to Myspace where people were free to interact with each other and the artists and share things they really like.

It's a little late now, though I could see an upstart indie label using that business model with some success. (In the Napster/Kazaa days, finding songs that were properly labeled and virus free was a pain in the ass. The record companies could have cornered the market right then by making the process convenient and hassle free.) I'd bet that whatever replaces current distribution methods is going to be a variant of it.

[ChaosKiwi]

I've thought about this quite a bit and been conflicted in the past.

In the end I think it is on the big companies who own the material to protect it. If I can get hold of the material for free then I don't care.

This is not a low consciousness decision. It is a low consciousness decision for big movie companies to stick to a business model that is clearly no longer relevant or working and spend millions in legal dollars protecting there sinking ship.

[success21]

Well, Personally I download a lot of movies and other personal developement material and I don't consider that as stealing or things like that. For example, I downloaded audio books made by the greats like Tony Robbins,Brian Tracy. These people have already made hundreds of millions of dollars during their lives and still making millions even today. And if you want to purchase any of Tony Robbins products, it doesn't come for less than $100 and you know, its WAY TOO HIGH for me to afford. How can people buy if they set prices like this? I know, some people can afford but for someone whose income is only about $500 a month, well, its too difficult.

Same with the movies that I occasionally download. Those big companies in the film industry are already making billions and billions of dollars. Why are they so greedy even after making this much money?(Anyway, I go to theaters to watch movies for the first time and I download which I like the most after that)For example, consider movies l Harry potter trilogy or Titanic. These movies made nearly $3 Billions and $1.85 Billion respectively in box office even with piracy. So,those people(MPAA & RIAA)want to eradicate piracy and still make more money?

The point is that those big companies in the film industry are not going to become bankarupt because of piracy.

[MidasGirl]

Originally Posted by themaster

What's your stand on pirating?

I don't have a stance.. I think everyone should stop trying to mind everyone else's business.. in short.. just stop judging!

In truth I'm a massive pirate rarely have I ever paid for anything..

According to my teacher by the magic power of reflection (aka LOA) this makes you "low consciousness mentality." I would again suggest the idea MidasGirl of not judging..

LMAO..........Wow. Is this sensitivity or what? Actually maybe I should have clarified, I was speaking for myself, as in: how do I view it for myself, if I found myself tempted to do it. I'm least bothered what other people do in their houses as per this issue. I just like to hear how they justify it. Makes for a fun way of getting to learn more about human behavior.

As well, because there have been people who've come to my house and done it, it's bothered me in the past. Hearing other peoples' opinion allows me to see where it might be possible to see things differently by understanding different mindsets. So thanks to those who actually took your time to explain the different POV's rather than snap back in a knee jerk fashion.

[themaster]

You know when I think about it more seriously.. I do have some judgments on piracy when it comes to customers.. as I work in computers..

My rule is "I don't pirate for customers period" recently though I have been relaxing this rule.. I guess if I am to live by my idea of "no judgments" even this will have to be relaxed and explains recently why I was going to give out illegal copies of nero and powerdvd to customers (as my thinking was I'm just replacing the dvd watching software and burning software they used to have before I fixed there computer)

Anyway.. let's talk about real piracy.. for real..

In all the forums I go to where you talk.. the subject of piracy can be touchy.. and then you have some angry "geek" types wanting to chew you out in judgment or condemnation of your actions..

I know piracy extremely well.. only usenet users have a clue what I'm talking about..

On a average day I download 1-3 high res blueray movies.. in the x264 format..

I have currently about 4.5 Tb all of it filled with movies like "The Matrix" "12 Monkeys" "Big Fish" "Star Wars" all movies collected off the usenet in the newer HDTV format.. I also have a good (these days) 4-15 Gb devoted to "new age" materials.. that's recordings of my teacher Bashar or Abraham + others.. (I have only spent money on "new age" in 3 ways.. one abraham book and cd set and twice visiting my other teacher in sedona)

I consider myself a early adopter as I have been downloading mp3's off the usenet since 2000 and collecting movies off the usenet since 2001 (back in the day it was divx)

A lot of people don't know or seem somewhat clueless that first it was a audio revolution on the usenet (Mp3) but that the video revolution has been in full swing and only getting better.. maybe in about 3-10 years it will have full on legal methods of watching h264/x264 streamed over the net in full on 1080p

[themaster]

Originally Posted by MidasGirl

LMAO..........Wow. Is this sensitivity or what? Actually maybe I should have clarified, I was speaking for myself, as in: how do I view it for myself, if I found myself tempted to do it. I'm least bothered what other people do in their houses as per this issue. I just like to hear how they justify it. Makes for a fun way of getting to learn more about human behavior.

As well, because there have been people who've come to my house and done it, it's bothered me in the past.

You need it sensitive?

What's wrong with the truth.. it's my understanding and perhaps you don't share this.. but if you judge others.. you lower yourself to their vibration.. therefore if you see someone stealing.. and you condemn them.. it is just like a magic mirror.. you condemn yourself?

What do I read above these texts.. I read 1001 moral justifications on why it's okay.. but what's wrong with saying the truth.. it is okay.. especially if you take away the MORAL part..

Yes, I say again take away morality which is a choice and you have bypassed your need to make up justifications to do what you want in this MORAL or immoral/no judgments world..

From my perspective and per my teacher(s).. there is no wrong choice, there is nothing we ever do that is not perfect.. if you people want to hold yourself back in morality.. go right ahead.. I give you full on permission

Originally Posted by MidasGirl

Hearing other peoples' opinion allows me to see where it might be possible to see things differently by understanding different mindsets. So thanks to those who actually took your time to explain the different POV's rather than snap back in a knee jerk fashion.

Well, I'm sorry my mindset can't work for you.. (that is limiting) keep reading or just fire up google as this is a endless old debate.. debated everywhere..

[MidasGirl]

Originally Posted by ChaosKiwi

I've thought about this quite a bit and been conflicted in the past.

In the end I think it is on the big companies who own the material to protect it. If I can get hold of the material for free then I don't care.

This is not a low consciousness decision. It is a low consciousness decision for big movie companies to stick to a business model that is clearly no longer relevant or working and spend millions in legal dollars protecting there sinking ship.

Right now all of them are very resistant to this change, and in fact spend big bucks trying to protect their stuff. This also includes the big software companies of course.

This does seem like an inevitable change they will have to adapt to, eventually. Maybe they'll have to rely on advertising only (the little pittance from it) and give movies and music for free. Or, it might just happen that they'll manage to protect some and let some slip.

It reminds me also of all the big designer companies that spend big lawyer bucks scouting ebay and other sites to make sure people aren't selling fake stuff bearing their brand names.

[MidasGirl]

Originally Posted by themaster

Well, I'm sorry my mindset can't work for you.. (that is limiting) keep reading or just fire up google as this is a endless old debate.. debated everywhere..

themaster, of course your mindset can't work for me. Who said I need it to?

[cacheborn]

Good post.

There was a TED talk about this, I forget the speaker. He gave the example of airplanes. It seems that before the advent of airplanes, the law in US was if somebody owns a land, he also owns the sky above it. They had to modify the law in order to make airplane flights possible. With the advent of technology, piracy is becoming much, much easier to do. If majority of people are breaking the law, intentionally or not, maybe the law should be modified.

When I was a student, there was little money to spare. So downloading movies was quite convenient. Now, I sometimes download movies and if I like it I buy the DVD. Renting DVDs is also a good option.

Rest of the money I spend on buying books.

[Brutha]

There was a TED talk about this, I forget the speaker. He gave the example of airplanes. It seems that before the advent of airplanes, the law in US was if somebody owns a land, he also owns the sky above it.

I guess you mean Larry Lessig.

[cacheborn]

Originally Posted by Brutha

I guess you mean Larry Lessig.

Yes, that's the one. Thanks, Brutha.

Incidentally, there is another related issue about which I have often wondered. I have a copy of the book The Little Prince and on the inside cover it states that,

"This paperback is sold subject to the condition that it shall not be lent, resold, hired out, or otherwise traded without the publisher's prior consent in any form of binding or cover...blah blah"

I understand everything except lent. So if a friend borrows this book and I let him, are we breaking the copyright law?

[MariconesUnited]

Originally Posted by themaster

You need it sensitive?

What's wrong with the truth.. it's my understanding and perhaps you don't share this.. but if you judge others.. you lower yourself to their vibration.. therefore if you see someone stealing.. and you condemn them.. it is just like a magic mirror.. you condemn yourself?

What do I read above these texts.. I read 1001 moral justifications on why it's okay.. but what's wrong with saying the truth.. it is okay.. especially if you take away the MORAL part..

Yes, I say again take away morality which is a choice and you have bypassed your need to make up justifications to do what you want in this MORAL or immoral/no judgments world..

From my perspective and per my teacher(s).. there is no wrong choice, there is nothing we ever do that is not perfect.. if you people want to hold yourself back in morality.. go right ahead.. I give you full on permission

There was no judging on MidasGirl's part, that's why she thinks you're being overly sensitive. You're just giving her more reason when you reference your history with debating people on this issue. You're coming up to the table with a loaded gun.

I do think that judging isn't constructive, but I don't see it in this case. I think you're being sensitive because people are bringing up an inconvenient truth...You're stealing. That's not a judgment it's a statement of fact. I'm stealing too but at least I'm not doing mental hoops with myself to obscure the truth.

I've seen good arguments in this thread for why the record labels should be discouraged. Convincing in fact. I have to confess however that I get annoyed when I see people convince themselves that they're not really stealing.

[Daffy Duck]

Ah, please.

Telling someone that it's wrong to judge, or that judging will "hold you back", is a judgment in of itself. Let's be real.

Hold you back from what? Something you judged to be better?

Of course, there are loving ways to judge, and not-so-loving ways. I prefer the loving ways.

On another note, I discovered piracy many years ago, sometime in the 90's when I was a young boy. It's interesting to see how it has changed over the years. I wonder how it will continue to change?

Originally Posted by themaster

A lot of people don't know or seem somewhat clueless that first it was a audio revolution on the usenet (Mp3)

Piracy was not "first" an audio revolution. That came much later. Software piracy was an issue even back in the 70's.

[YourHumbleNarrator]

Originally Posted by MariconesUnited

I've seen good arguments in this thread for why the record labels should be discouraged. Convincing in fact. I have to confess however that I get annoyed when I see people convince themselves that they're not really stealing.

Could it be because they're not?