# Is it legal for ISP to shut me down for file sharing?

Discussion in 'Computer Science & Culture' started by the_cooke, Oct 22, 2003.

Not open for further replies.
1. ### XeviousTruth Beyond LogicRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
964
As an ex professional musician and a computer tech I have mixed feelings on MP3 sharing.

As a musician you would have thought I would have sided with Lars against Napster, but the reverse happened. As a Musician I was FURIOUS with him. If we as musicians bring with what we produce real happiness into peoples lives (which is the whole POINT of music's existance) then who the hell are we to deny that happiness to people? I never starved as a musician BTW... I always had enough to make rent, had something in my tummy (often provided by a kind fan before or after the performance). Maybe being a Classical / Jazz trained musician I see things differntly from commercial musicians. Then again, I'm not a Metallica fan. To me they aren't musicians.

As a computer user I can understand how copywrite issues can hurt your pocketbook on the other hand. A programmer works hard on his software and deserves just compensation. But what is just compensation? Certanly not the mere $50 that Bill Gates paid the nameless man down on his luck who wrote MS-DOS 1.0... 2. ### Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement to hide all adverts. 3. ### spuriousmonkeyBannedBanned Messages: 24,066 I put books that I read on the book shelve at work for other people to take (and do whatever they want with it). is that also filesharing? and illegal? 4. ### Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement to hide all adverts. 5. ### sweet PentaxRegistered Senior Member Messages: 920 it would be filesharing i think .... but i guess nobody mentioned such case until yet ! if you compare it to "real" filesharing , you can´t find many differences ...can you ? 6. ### Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement to hide all adverts. 7. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member Messages: 18,474 I had this problem happen to me as well. So I stopped share software (unless on personal messaging demand) haven’t been bothered again apparently anime and comics are not high on the anti-pirating hit list. I don’t have a problem sharing if I happen to have a file and another person uploads it, s/he is the one stealing, I’m just the guy that left the pie on the windowsill. As for downloading most of what I download is not yet even available in the states, or has been ripped off TV. Even so when I do download a product that is available my philosophy is that I don’t have any money to buy it so I would not have purchases it in the first place, no lose for them if I download it or not. 8. ### blackmonkeystatueUnregistered UserRegistered Senior Member Messages: 174 It's not the same thing. When people share files over the internet they don't give people their file, they let them have a copy of it. ..that is, unless you transcribe the whole book page by page before you put it on the shelf...yeah, I didn't think so. How is this any different from musicians? Musicians don't work hard and deserve just compensation? You can spout off that bullshit about making music for the good of humanity, but come on, get real. People are people, and people aren't always altruistic regarding their work, this world runs on money. People can be passionate about doing anything. Just because other people enjoy what they do, doesn't mean they are entitled to it without paying for it. A woman down the street from me gives amazing blowjobs, I really enjoy her work. Should I get free head? Should I get to see movies that cost millions of dollars to make for free? Should I be able to listen to a local man's music who plays songs on his guitar and sells CDs for$2 for free by copying someone else's CD and not paying the man himself? This man that makes his living selling his music for $2 a CD. Is it right? Yes, big time musicians are not poor, but it doesnt make it right. It's the same thing all the way around. I've no idea what filesharing has to do with a monopoly. Sure you could relate it...but if you did there wouldn't be a point. One company holding the rights to, and solely selling the new Britney Spears CD...OMG! MONOPOLY! Wtf? Come on man, honestly... A middle class man writes a song and then he does what the next phrase is stating (and I quote) "But to keep their idea for themselves and be the sole selling entity" and sells them out of his house, he's a monopoly? In an unlawful, unjust, unfair sense? He doesn't deserve compensation? I f you're not willing to pay the price I guess you won't be enjoying it will you? I'd love a 21inch LCD flat screen monitor. I just don't think it's worth paying$4,000 for. I guess I won't be enjoying one will I?

Yes, for PURCHASING. This whole lawsuit/scandal/debate is about the fact that people are not purchasing this music.

Hate to break it to you, but the artists, don't pick a price and put it out on the rack. Big suprise? I sure as hell hope not. A lot goes into making a CD. They usually make hardly anything off of their first album. Only the successful entertainers are the wealthy ones. And why shouldn't someone that is good at what they do be rewarded? Isn't that one of the points of striving to succeed? Or do CEO's of big companies and lawyers and doctors get to the top just to get that "feel good" feeling of accomplishment? They don't really want the money do they? They don't really deserve it do they? This whole concept is wrong isn't it? People making money is bad! People who have more money than I do are evil and I should enjoy the fruits of their labour without paying for it, right?

Umm...that is why we have this term called "intellectual property". Yes, it is stealing. Just because you haven't stolen something material and tangible from them doesn't mean you haven't stolen anything. That's why there are laws against plagarism. That's why there was a lawsuit against Vanilla Ice when he copied the beat from "Under Pressure" by David Bowie/Queen in "Ice Ice Baby". It's a piss poor example you made. Of course it's stealing. The Porsche company isn't selling metal/fiberglass/whatever other materials, they're selling a Porsche, the feeling you get when you drive it, the quality, the look, the feel. Just like with CDs and music companies. They're not selling a little plastic disk. You can buy a 100 pack of those for \$9. They're selling what's on the disc.

This music is these peoples' career. When people excel in something that others enjoy, it's usually typical that they incur a monetary gain. Or...is this a new concept to you?

9. ### sweet PentaxRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
920
companies try to rip off people --- and people don´t accept it , that´s all .....
ok , you can drive a porsche before you buy it , but can you watch a movie or play a game before you pay for it ? no ? that´s the important point , mister

i want to know what exactly i´m buying , that´s all !

This music is these peoples' career

and people want fame rather than money ; if metallica would go bankrupt - they still would like to see people listen to their music ... wouldn´t they ?

10. ### spuriousmonkeyBannedBanned

Messages:
24,066
I think I must disagree,

the second, third, fifth, 20th reader never paid anything for the book I bought. How is this not filesharing? What does it matter that it is not copied?

It is still filesharing if someone downloads a file, and the original owner of the file deletes it. He never bought the rights to use the file. Or would it then be ok?

I don't have to have a copy of the book. I already read it. It is of no use to me. I used the file already.

11. ### blackmonkeystatueUnregistered UserRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
174
People can "not accept it" by not buying. Stealing (or whatever the hell you want to call it) doesn't correct anything, it in fact, makes people worse than the companies...if you look at things that way.

I'm not sure if you realize this, but the American society, as I'm sure many others, rely on this principle: Goods and Services are exchanged for money. This may be a difficult concept for you to grasp, but believe me, it's true. Taking/using goods/services without "paying" undermines this concept.

Word it any way you want, look at it from any angle you want. It is what it is.

By this logic you would listen to the first 30 seconds of a song. Unless of course you test drive a car for 5 years, beat a game before you buy it, and watch a whole movie before you go see it. I can assure you that the majority of these people "filesharing" are not downloading these complete songs to "check them out" before going to the store and purchasing the CDs. They've heard them on the radio/saw them on tv (and thus, already checked them out) and DLd them to obtain them without purchasing.

Hmm... So...it's ok for you to download something because you weren't going to buy it? But the people who were going to buy it should have to pay for it? Excuse me a moment, but let me go ahead and file this under "what the fuck?". If you don't want to buy it, that's fine. You just won't get to enjoy it. You see that? There's a trade-off. It has to do with something we call an "economy". It's like you don't understand this simple concept, either that or won't accept it. You couldn't possibly be doing something wrong right?

Things cost money. You may not think it's fair, but the whole point of working is to make money to buy these things to enjoy. The harder you work, the more you make, the more you can enjoy. If everything were free there'd be no point. I've mentioned this a few times now, is this over your head?

You're not entitled to the work of other people. If they wanted it to be free, they'd make it free. If you don't agree with it, don't buy it. If nobody buys what someone is trying to sell, that someone will change the deal. It's really not that complicated.

Plain and simple, you're in the wrong. You can spout this bullshit all you want, but when it comes down to it, you're worse than they are. If you're OK with that, then fine. Just stop trying to justify or downplay what you're doing.

There you go again, trying to justify your actions... *sigh*

And one of the band members told you this? I may have missed it, but I uhh...didn't see a quote. Thanks collective universal musician representative, but you're doing a shitty job, you're fired.

12. ### blackmonkeystatueUnregistered UserRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
174
When you copy something you make more than one. When you bought something, you payed for one of them, no more. If this was about people buying CDs, listening to them, then giving their one CD to another person, I assure you there'd be no problem. That one payed for "thing" is still one...and still payed for.

You know monkey, I um...well, I hate to tell you this, because I know it well break your heart. And believe me, this isn't easy for me to say, but I think it to be something you should know. *takes a deep breath* When people share files over the internet they VERY seldomly (if ever) give that file to one person then delete it off of their hardrives. I know, I know, I didn't believe it at first when I heard it either. Honestly, do you really think that's what this whole "scandal" is about? People giving one other people their file and then deleting them? Christ...

And?

One person reading a book and giving that book to someone else in no way relates to what this whole thing is about. This is about people putting other people's work on the internet (that they payed for or not) for thousands (millions?) of other people to make copies of and use for free. The creator should be compensated for however many instances of their work are being used. This is fair. You don't have to pay for it, but you won't get to enjoy it. You pay for it because you want to enjoy it.

If people didn't think it was worth enjoying being at a baseball game they'd watch it at home on a TV (that they payed for because they enjoy using it). They don't mind paying the, at times, high prices for a ticket to go to a game. Again I must ask, is this whole concept foreign to you?

13. ### spuriousmonkeyBannedBanned

Messages:
24,066
i don't know. Are you aware that you are expressing an opinion and that I don't have to agree with you?

let's add a few words to your own statement and see if you can see the difference.

This is about people putting other people's work on the internet/public bookshelve (that they payed for or not) for 50 other people to make copies of and use for free.

there is only one difference actually...the group of users seems to be smaller. How essential...duh...

Last edited: Dec 1, 2003
14. ### sweet PentaxRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
920
Originally posted by blackmonkeystatue
People can "not accept it" by not buying. Stealing (or whatever the hell you want to call it) doesn't correct anything, it in fact, makes people worse than the companies...if you look at things that way.

who wants to forbid me to be worse than companies ? laws ???
no , they fuck me , and hence - i fuck them ! where is the problem ? they are allowed to do so , i am too ( from the moralic side , of course )

I'm not sure if you realize this, but the American society, as I'm sure many others, rely on this principle: Goods and Services are exchanged for money. This may be a difficult concept for you to grasp, but believe me, it's true. Taking/using goods/services without "paying" undermines this concept.

"american society" means shit , but well , that would be off-topic

see , if you make a good product , people will buy it ! if not .... well , that´s the reason why i download things !
lol , you think all companies have that problem ? no ... just make your products good enough , and you don´t have to fear filesharing !

Word it any way you want, look at it from any angle you want. It is what it is.

yeah , that´s the point with most things .... it is , what it is ...... but please don´t think that you are the one that knows WHAT it is

By this logic you would listen to the first 30 seconds of a song. Unless of course you test drive a car for 5 years, beat a game before you buy it, and watch a whole movie before you go see it. I can assure you that the majority of these people "filesharing" are not downloading these complete songs to "check them out" before going to the store and purchasing the CDs. They've heard them on the radio/saw them on tv (and thus, already checked them out) and DLd them to obtain them without purchasing.

YOU JUST DON`T GET IT , RIGHT ???
first i have to say i´m talking about me , and not all filesharer ....
i download games , music and movies , and what i still like and use regulary after watching / listening / playing it is worth buying !!!
but for example almost all the games i download i just play for 1-2 days ( because they are BAD )
now i don´t know about you , but i am one of the persons who don´t like to throw good money out of the window ..... FOR NOTHING !

Hmm... So...it's ok for you to download something because you weren't going to buy it? But the people who were going to buy it should have to pay for it? Excuse me a moment, but let me go ahead and file this under "what the fuck?". If you don't want to buy it, that's fine. You just won't get to enjoy it. You see that? There's a trade-off. It has to do with something we call an "economy". It's like you don't understand this simple concept, either that or won't accept it. You couldn't possibly be doing something wrong right?

see my pro-riaa-friend , i thought that´s the problem of the companies .... they are claiming that they don´t make enough profits because of guys like ME

Things cost money. You may not think it's fair, but the whole point of working is to make money to buy these things to enjoy. The harder you work, the more you make, the more you can enjoy. If everything were free there'd be no point. I've mentioned this a few times now, is this over your head?

Klugscheisser ...

hey ..what´s up with you people ??? filesharer have no morals , filesharer have no clue that something called economy exists .... what else ?
yeah , sure things cost money .... but are they all worth it ?
now don´t tell me that doesn´t depend on my opinion !

You're not entitled to the work of other people. If they wanted it to be free, they'd make it free. If you don't agree with it, don't buy it. If nobody buys what someone is trying to sell, that someone will change the deal. It's really not that complicated.

maybe i always buy things i like , maybe i like to buy good things ..... but that doesn´t fit into your world-view , aye ?

Plain and simple, you're in the wrong. You can spout this bullshit all you want, but when it comes down to it, you're worse than they are. If you're OK with that, then fine. Just stop trying to justify or downplay what you're doing.

i´m worse ? maybe .... but hey , they started with it

btw , i don´t downplay this whole thing , i´m giving you my point , that´s all

And one of the band members told you this? I may have missed it, but I uhh...didn't see a quote. Thanks collective universal musician representative, but you're doing a shitty job, you're fired.

let me get this straight ... you want to tell me that if musicians can´t have the money , they don´t want have at least the fame ?????