feralucce
Extreme Fanatic   Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 6/8/2003 at 07:34 AM |
Britva: we all know the legality... in this forum... I want to discuss the
morality of it, because asI have pointed out in my column there are some
pretty stupid things that have been made illegal...
BUT since that discussion doesna seem to have worked out... let's go to a
grey area, fuck mp3s... Digital video... rips of stuff that has been on
cable but not broadcast... is it moral to copy that?
____________________
The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist
|
| |
Britva
Moderator   Posts: 37 Registered: 1/8/2003 Status: Offline
|
posted on 6/8/2003 at 07:52 AM |
Let me see if I can make my moral argument more clear then. What I was
trying to say is that everyone agrees stealing is wrong (well, mostly), so
the morality of mp3 trading mainly rests on whether or not you agree with
our intellectual property laws that say a piece of art is the property of
the person who created it. Most people take this fact for granted and see
mp3 trading as stealing and therefore immoral. However, there are other
possible systems where art would not be the property of the creator and
therefore distributing it would not be stealing. In this kind of system,
mp3 trading would be moral.
In other words, the morality of mp3 trading is not absolute but rather
rests on the current legal climate. Currently, though, I don't see any way
to get around the fact that mp3 trading is stealing (excpet for the few
exceptions mentioned above).
|
| |
Ironboots
Extreme Fanatic  Posts: 893 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 6/8/2003 at 09:31 AM |
Hmmm... Digital video? I've never done it (never had the bandwidth  ) so I've never
considered the morality of it before...
Part of me says that its immoral, but then part of me wonders what the
difference is between stealing mp3s and stealing movies. I'm mixed. On one
hand, movies are made with tight budgets where money=amount of creative
power; Less money in the budget means that the producer has less
opportunity to get creative and instead has to play the puppet of the
financially-minded film exec. Meaning we get crappy movies.
BUT I think that some people's salaries (actors, directors, producers,
anyone with a "name") are over-inflated, which means that they're just
porkin' out, and it'd be okay to steal.
I guess you could say I hate rich people... ____________________
Piggy's got the Conch!
|
| |
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 8/8/2003 at 11:38 PM |
actually... by technical definition, if you are not selling, or playing in
a public forum, copyright has little to say...
Feral ____________________
The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist
|
| |
Britva
Moderator Posts: 37 Registered: 1/8/2003 Status: Offline
|
posted on 9/8/2003 at 11:10 AM |
There's a kernel of truth there, but check out this quote from an article
called 10 Myths About Copyright:
2) "If I don't charge for it, it's not a violation."
False. Whether you charge can affect the damages awarded in court, but
that's main difference under the law. It's still a violation if you give it
away -- and there can still be serious damages if you hurt the commercial
value of the property. There is an exception for personal copying of music,
which is not a violation, though courts seem to have said that doesn't
include widescale anonymous personal copying as Napster.
The copyright violation in trading mp3s is not that you are making money
off of someone else's copyrighted material, but rather that you are hurting
the commercial value of the songs you are sharing.
|
| |
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 10/8/2003 at 08:15 AM |
Actually... it truly does depend on the medium... file sharing... is
considere4d a public exhibition of the materials... Now... when I download
an mp3, it get's sorted to a folder that IS NOT shared. In the napster
class action suit there was a group that did the same thing. THese people
were declared innocent of all charges. the reasoning: since they were not
using the files for public exhibition, they were not in vioation of
copyright law.
____________________
The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist
|
| |
tallidaho
Member   Posts: 50 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 12/8/2003 at 07:33 AM |
Evolution is an inevitable thing. Everything that is today, digital, was
once not. All music was once recorded on big circular disks that went
'round and 'round at 45 RPM (and still do, in my house) All video was once
availible only at the movie houses. The development into other formats,
digital included, is something that the "industry" not only should have
expected, but planned for by making high-quality products.
An example: When recordable VHS tapes came out on the market, you can bet
that the movie studios were NOT happy with that. People could now record
copies of their movies. Doom and destruction were predicted. And yet... the
movie industry survived. Hell, in the long run, it thrived. Why? Because
the studios started producing a higher-quality (arguably) product, and
developed a higher-quality format, giving people a reason to pay $15 for a
VHS tape, or even to cough out the money for a DVD player and DVDs.
Of course, it is now possible to record DVDs. And yes, the pirates will
find a way to get past the protection software on the new CDs and DVDs.
Video will be traded. Music will be traded. The industry should, instead of
working against those that like the product enough to download it, should
embrace it.
Another example: I've got a South Park / Matrix spin-off comedy video on my
computer- distributed free on the creator's website, there is about 10
seconds of self-promotion at the beginning. Sure, I don't ENJOY watching
it, but I don't have the motivation to go into my video editor and delete
it, because it's 10 seconds and it's pretty far down on my priority list.
So why not allow music and video to be distributed for free with a small
amount of advertising at the beginning and end, with ad-free versions
availible for a small amount of cold, hard, digital cash? This business
model works well for many online not-online companies.
So the morality?
Forgetting that everyone's morality is slightly different, I think that it
is okay to share/download video, music, etc. in reasonable amounts (not
1000's of songs an hour- that one could not logistically ever listen to)
because it is pushing the studios and "the industry" into devlopment and
innovation- and without innovation, there is stagnation and compliance,
neither of which are really beneficial.
That's my two cents. ____________________
Being Passionate is the only way to survive
|
| |
Shade
Fanatic   Posts: 289 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 12/8/2003 at 10:01 AM |
I'm coming to the conclusion that I have a very loose(if at all) grasp on
morality these days, and I'm happy with it that way. But my understanding
of the concept of Morality is that it is similar to daylight savings time.
Morality is defined by the local (for a defined value of "local") community
in terms of the community. Or, to translate out of puritan and back into
human: Morality is not what the majority does, but what the majority thinks
the rest of the majority thinks is OK. Just because everyone eats pop tarts
at midnight in the small town of Blime doesn't make it ok, but, if a
majority of people are willing to go on record as saying that eating pop
tarts at midnight is OK, then it is a moral act.
So to make that a bit more conclusive and personal; I personally don't
think there is anything wrong with file trading. In order to speak on the
morality of the issue, I would have to see what the majority says, and I
would guess that they will not be willing to say it's ok, no matter how
many copies of Brittny spears and the new hulk movie they have uploaded to
someone else in the office. ____________________
It is only through the lack of sex that humanity derives the need for an
all encompassing blind love. And in that moment of extreme horniness with
no relief in sight, in that moment can be found the birth of religion.
-Me
|
| |
Abbadon
Fanatic  Posts: 499 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 12/8/2003 at 05:21 PM |
| What the hell has the legal system got to do with privacy? ____________________
Light is changing to shadow, and casting a shroud over all we have known.
|
| |
tallidaho
Member Posts: 50 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 12/8/2003 at 09:14 PM |
Oh boy. Where do I start on this one?
Privacy has always been a legal issue, if for nothing else, the assumed
"right to privacy" that has been addressed by the supreme court several
times. Very long story that I could go on for about hours short, Privacy is
the base issue in everything from illegal search and seizure to FCC
regulations.
If anyone wants the long explanation, just ask, and I'll give you the full
rundown. ____________________
Being Passionate is the only way to survive
|
| |
Ironboots
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 893 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 12/8/2003 at 09:52 PM |
That's a good metaphor (err... simile), Shade... Your morality depends on
the company you keep... If the section of society that you look to support
for is doing something, then you'll approve of it, too.
Myself, I think that most people think small-scale file-sharing is ok, so
I'm cool with it, too. ____________________
Piggy's got the Conch!
|
| |
