Yeah, and easy of theft of copyrighted material.
Back in the old days, criminals had to actually work to make a living at criminal activity, now they just sit in front of a computer and steal.
LONG LIVE CRIME ....LONG LIVE CRIMINALS!
Baron Max
1stMay2007 The Day on which Moderation Died
- Thread starter Singularity
- Start date
Yeah, and easy of theft of copyrighted material.
Back in the old days, criminals had to actually work to make a living at criminal activity, now they just sit in front of a computer and steal.
LONG LIVE CRIME ....LONG LIVE CRIMINALS!
Baron Max
countezero
Registered Senior Member
Regardless of when you think I'm living, I fail to see how broader access and choice excuse the rank immorality of theft, Samcd.
Seriously, do you really think stealing is OK, simply because it's done through the internet and you don't have to see the victim of your crime face-to-face?
Seriously, do you really think stealing is OK, simply because it's done through the internet and you don't have to see the victim of your crime face-to-face?
I think people should make their work available. It works well in science, all students can have access to professional work in their field. Otherwise, how would the field progress so rapidly?
Even with music, the radio is free isn't it?
countezero
Registered Senior Member
Radio isn't free. It's paid for with subscriptions or advertising.
There are plenty of scientists who don't give their work away, either. Or do you think Edison didn't patent the light bulb? Those scientists who do publish their research in journals and such are often paid for such publications and oftentimes have been conducting their research with grant monies and other subsidies. In other words, somebody is paying them. Nobody works for free, Sam. Face it...
Answer the question: Do you think stealing someone else's property is moral?
There are plenty of scientists who don't give their work away, either. Or do you think Edison didn't patent the light bulb? Those scientists who do publish their research in journals and such are often paid for such publications and oftentimes have been conducting their research with grant monies and other subsidies. In other words, somebody is paying them. Nobody works for free, Sam. Face it...
Answer the question: Do you think stealing someone else's property is moral?
Edison did.
countezero
Registered Senior Member
What's your point? To excuse immorality with more immorality?
works for me
Do you think scientific processes and findings should be patented? What about life saving drugs?
superstring01
Moderator
You're kidding right? In the next ten years the US government expects about half the drug corporations on earth to go bankrupt or to consolidate because of lost revinues due to various governments around the world FORCING them to "generickize" their drugs. The "life saving drugs" you speak of are the result of thousands of scienteists (paying off thousands of dollars in college loans, supporting a family, etc.**) doing research in hundreds of laboratories around the world. Should scientists be forced to work for free... how about the investors who ponied up their money to pay for the millions of dollars it cost to develop the drugs.
So, here's an idea... stop paying the scientists for the drugs and see how many new drugs you get.
Just for the record: is there anybody on this website who works a full week... for free? If so: (a) I probably wouldn't believe you and (b) if you REALLY did, then I'd like to know how you eat, shit, and sleep without income.
~String
_____________________________________________________________
** add it up: the cost of the buildings, the cost of the staffing (scientists, administrators-- all feeding their families, paying taxes, etc), the cost of the equipment (billions of dollars)-- all has to paid for from SOMEWHERE-- the consumers who buy the drugs obviuosly have to pay for them, lest there would be no drugs. The scientists you speak of are paying for their education, usually, by loans, those loans in turn pay for the education system, which in turn employs thousands more in those various jobs... and on... and on... and on.
No reasonable person would deny the right of multi-trillionaire companies to limit the theft and misuse of their intellectual property. However, it's the sneaky, underhand, overly restrictive (even - in fact, especially - for legal users, what with rootkits and the like) methods they use to achieve their aims that gets people's backs up.
There has always been, and always will be, a battle between giant corporations and the little man over this kind of thing. It's just human nature. Everyone likes something for nothing, and everyone likes to get one over on Megalomaniacs Incorporated. Yes it's illegal, and many would say immoral (though just as many, like me, wouldn't - personally I think these companies are rich enough
I agree
samcdkey:
I've seldom seen such uninformed rubbish from you.
All those things also depend on people being adequately compensated for their labour.
People will not write literature for nothing. They will not produce music for nothing. They will not do science for nothing.
Everybody else in the world is paid for their labour. So why should artists and producers of intellectual rather than physical output be different from the rest of the world? Why should somebody who mows your lawn for you be paid for their work, yet a person who writes a novel should be expected to do so for no return?
I am astounded you hold such a silly view.
The radio is not free. Radio stations pay royalties for every piece of copyright music they broadcast - and so they should.
Look, I'll make it simple for you.
Imagine you spend 6 months writing a novel. You devote 6 months of your life to writing. You then spend more time and energy shopping around for a publisher. Perhaps you even pay to publish it yourself.
The next day, somebody starts putting out "pirate" copies of your book. Every copy sold gives absolutely no return to you - all the money goes to the "pirate".
Is this the world you want? Is this fair, according to you?
I've seldom seen such uninformed rubbish from you.
All those things also depend on people being adequately compensated for their labour.
People will not write literature for nothing. They will not produce music for nothing. They will not do science for nothing.
Everybody else in the world is paid for their labour. So why should artists and producers of intellectual rather than physical output be different from the rest of the world? Why should somebody who mows your lawn for you be paid for their work, yet a person who writes a novel should be expected to do so for no return?
I am astounded you hold such a silly view.
I think people should make their work available. It works well in science, all students can have access to professional work in their field. Otherwise, how would the field progress so rapidly?
Even with music, the radio is free isn't it?
The radio is not free. Radio stations pay royalties for every piece of copyright music they broadcast - and so they should.
Look, I'll make it simple for you.
Imagine you spend 6 months writing a novel. You devote 6 months of your life to writing. You then spend more time and energy shopping around for a publisher. Perhaps you even pay to publish it yourself.
The next day, somebody starts putting out "pirate" copies of your book. Every copy sold gives absolutely no return to you - all the money goes to the "pirate".
Is this the world you want? Is this fair, according to you?
Again, there's a large part of me that thinks that the 'artistes' who care overmuch about lost dollars are the ones that deserve to get screwed.
*Cough* Metallica
It's a funny thing, intellectual property, though, innit. Stealing an album isn't quite the same as not paying your gardener. If you don't pay your gardener then the labour he's expended cutting your lawn is lost and can't be recovered. It's not re-usable. The same thing doesn't quite apply to stealing an album, which can be downloaded 1000s of times, over and over again, without extra labour being expended on the part of it's creator. The same applies to novels.
As regards recompense: would the person who downloads a work buy it legally (thus compensating the creator) if it couldn't be acquired in any other way? We can't say for sure that they would. So (given the reusability of the resource) we can't say for sure that the creator is 'losing' anything (either in terms of labour or profits)... can we?
*Cough* Metallica
It's a funny thing, intellectual property, though, innit. Stealing an album isn't quite the same as not paying your gardener. If you don't pay your gardener then the labour he's expended cutting your lawn is lost and can't be recovered. It's not re-usable. The same thing doesn't quite apply to stealing an album, which can be downloaded 1000s of times, over and over again, without extra labour being expended on the part of it's creator. The same applies to novels.
As regards recompense: would the person who downloads a work buy it legally (thus compensating the creator) if it couldn't be acquired in any other way? We can't say for sure that they would. So (given the reusability of the resource) we can't say for sure that the creator is 'losing' anything (either in terms of labour or profits)... can we?
w1z4rd
Valued Senior Member
It seems to be only a crime in police states... shame poor yanks. In South Africa, its not illegal to make a copy of anything. Our law states it only becomes illegal when you sell the pirated item for a profit.
So when people say you "steal" and "commit a crime", ask them to show you the exact law which makes you the criminal as most countries don't have draconian corporate sponsored laws like our American friends. The reason I am asking you to check, it because our version of RIAA, are scummy liars. They have put billboards up everywhere with slogans like "Piracy is like theft" (Notice the "like")... however when you approach them to clarify which law you have broken.. they fade away grumbling their dogma.
I think RIAA is trying to brainwash the world one country at a time, and decided to start with the largest gullible population in the world.
LONG LIVE SWEDEN!!!!
Last edited:
All those scientist are immoral, they are making money off Pain and suffering of poor and dieaseased.
The research should be funded by government, PERIOD.
The main point is adequate compensation. Do you think a system where music, literature and science is available to all will develop without adequate compensation? Of course not, for the simple reason that no one will work for nothing.
The iTunes concept for example, makes music affordable and many people are willing to purchase music when the rate is reasonable. Would you rather pay $0.99 for a song or $25 for a CD?
Its the corporations that make money when they set up all these checks to limit access. That is what I disagree with.
superstring01
Moderator
You're right! We should turn to the the blazing success of the Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba and [cough] France for examples of how to run a country.
Ug... Singularity how about backing that claim up with some real substance.
In case you hadn't noticed, most of the scintific advances on this planet, have happened in FREE, MARKET societies. For better or worse, the price you pay for development is capitalism. In the end, necessity may be the mother of invention, but removing that, compensation seems to be the only stand in. I for one, would NEVER work for free. I doubt you would too. Oh-- and yes, I love to earn money. Striving for something is what most people do. The goal of "a better Earth" sounds nice but is far too elusive for most people to grasp. Tell me again, which states socialism HAS worked in?
Oh-- so, for the record, all those scientists who are "immoral"... wouldn't they be working for a government doing the research anyway? So, shifting the immorality to the government would somehow make it good? Brilliant syllogism!
~String
http://openprosthetics.org/
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070417/hl_nm/gates_pharmaceuticals_dc
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07116/781042-192.stm
And these immorals dont have problems with funding NASA.
Buffalo Roam
Registered Senior Member
Singularity
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
And there is a lot of money being made with the research that NASA conducts. It isn't done for free with out profit. And a lot of new medicines have been created through the space program, and to get your project on a mission cost millions of dollars, with out profited if left up to the government nothing would get done, out side of defence devlopement.
.
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
And there is a lot of money being made with the research that NASA conducts. It isn't done for free with out profit. And a lot of new medicines have been created through the space program, and to get your project on a mission cost millions of dollars, with out profited if left up to the government nothing would get done, out side of defence devlopement.
Buffalo Roam
Registered Senior Member
w1z4rd
But a profit has been made by you, you have just pocketed the money that would have been paid to the person that has created the intellectual property that you are now enjoying, and with out that income could it be possible that the person who created that enjoyment for you might have to quit, lose his way of making a life for him and his family? because you stole his income, from selling that intellectual property?
But a profit has been made by you, you have just pocketed the money that would have been paid to the person that has created the intellectual property that you are now enjoying, and with out that income could it be possible that the person who created that enjoyment for you might have to quit, lose his way of making a life for him and his family? because you stole his income, from selling that intellectual property?
Oddly enough, I would rather depend on the sense of fair play and the consciences of the customers than on copyright laws. Star Wars was one of the most pirated movies ever and it was the most profitable. Spiderman, same story. The most pirated movies and software do make the most money, and they make tremendous amounts of profit, so immoral or not, the system works and makes money for the artists. This is a lot of crying over the profits that some millionaires or billionaires may have lost instead of celebrating over the profits that were made.
I'm tired of the whining. Even more, I am tired of the way that millionaires and billionaires can whine and get what they want and I can't get decent pay for a day's work.
I'm tired of the whining. Even more, I am tired of the way that millionaires and billionaires can whine and get what they want and I can't get decent pay for a day's work.
Last edited: