Go Back   Hardware Canucks > NEWS & REVIEWS > Press Releases & Tech News

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71 (permalink)  
Old May 3, 2009, 08:40 AM
Dave510's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Markham, Ontario
Posts: 276

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by futures View Post
Good points. As for the restaurant analogy.. I did consider the "tangible" aspect.. and yes there is something lost in viewing films, music, and playing games prior to paying.. that is its done.. the individual who watches say a film has already consumed the film.. and if they say its only ok.. and have yet to pay for it.. there is no undoing the watching of the film.. and if they the film hasn't been paid for in some manner.. renting / purchasing, etc.. then its theft.. just like there is no undoing the consumption of eating a meal that one might just consider only OK.. yet would no doubt pay for it.
How exactly did they "consume" the film? That's hardly tangible. And if the analogy is to work on that ground (that something cannot be undone), then everything in this world is analogous to everything else in the same sense. No action can be undone since an action occurs at a unique position, and once it's done, it's done. Therefore the analogy would just be trivially relevant.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #72 (permalink)  
Old May 3, 2009, 08:58 AM
sswilson's Avatar
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 14,535

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave510 View Post
How exactly did they "consume" the film? That's hardly tangible. And if the analogy is to work on that ground (that something cannot be undone), then everything in this world is analogous to everything else in the same sense. No action can be undone since an action occurs at a unique position, and once it's done, it's done. Therefore the analogy would just be trivially relevant.
If they've seen it without paying for it then they've consumed the content of the film. Just as a person who steals a book off of the shelf without paying for it has "consumed" the content thus rendering it's resale value to them greatly lessened even if they later put it back up on the shelf.

And I let it slip by earlier without comment, but I cannot believe that you tried to equate the legality of content piracy with legitimate civil rights battles of the past. Sorry, but there is absolutely no possible way to compare the two outside of a desperate attempt to justify theft of somebody else's property on the backs of those with legitimate complaints against the system.

Theft is theft whether it's physical or intelectual property. If somebody wants you to have something of theirs for free they'll give you access to it. Otherwise, I support bringing the full force of the law in to play for each and every instance of stolen property the criminal has a hand in disseminating.
__________________
MSI Z87I Gaming AC / i5 4670K / 2X 4G Gskill 1866 DDR3 / XFX XTR 750 / EVGA GTX 680 SC+ 2GB / Intel DC S3700 200G / random 160G Sata HDD
Inwin 904 / Swiftech MCP655-b / Alphacool NexXxos XT45 120 Rad / 2X Scythe GT AP-15 / EK Supreme HF / Dell UltraSharp U2412M

Asrock AM1H-ITX / AM1 Athlon 5350 / 2X4G Gskill PC3-14900 / Intel 6235 Wi-Fi / 90W Targus Power Brick / 320G Seagate Momentus / Mini-Box M350 / 1X 22" Dell IPS / 1X 22" HP
Reply With Quote
  #73 (permalink)  
Old May 3, 2009, 09:08 AM
Rookie
F@H
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sswilson View Post
If they've seen it without paying for it then they've consumed the content of the film. Just as a person who steals a book off of the shelf without paying for it has "consumed" the content thus rendering it's resale value to them greatly lessened even if they later put it back up on the shelf.
No it is more like someone that goes into a book store and reads a book (or part of it) and decides not to buy it.

Many people would simply choose not to buy it in the first place if they weren't sure they would like it. Hence someone that downloads music or games in many cases does go out and actually buy it if they like it, and otherwise they just delete it again. This means that in many cases the people that "steal" it first, become paying customers, while if they hadn't "stolen" it first, they would never have become a customer. Not that the entertainment industry seems to understand that kind of concept.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sswilson View Post
And I let it slip by earlier without comment, but I cannot believe that you tried to equate the legality of content piracy with legitimate civil rights battles of the past. Sorry, but there is absolutely no possible way to compare the two outside of a desperate attempt to justify theft of somebody else's property on the backs of those with legitimate complaints against the system.

Theft is theft whether it's physical or intelectual property. If somebody wants you to have something of theirs for free they'll give you access to it. Otherwise, I support bringing the full force of the law in to play for each and every instance of stolen property the criminal has a hand in disseminating.
Well no it isn't. Physical property theft involves the loss of something when someone else gains something. Intellectual property theft does not involve any loss, only a gain. Don't believe the crap from companies that think every illegal copy is equal to one sale that would have happened. Many of those illegal copies in fact result in a future sale, and most others are cases that would simply have done without rather than pay for it. Either way the owner still has their stuff and can still sell it all they want, so they lost nothing.
__________________
Len Sorensen
Reply With Quote
  #74 (permalink)  
Old May 3, 2009, 09:16 AM
encorp's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,425

My System Specs

Default

I don't think there really is much of an argument about whether or not intellectual property is tangible and whether piracy is theft or not. What it comes down to is that If I buy a movie, or a CD I should be able to do with it what I please. I buy a novel right now I can let you read it, but I can't by law let you listen my music or my CD.

In fact as the law stands now, playing a home movie for anyone other than my immediate family is illegal. I can't have 50 friends over for a party and allow them to watch the movie with me. Hell, we do it all the time, but it's illegal.

Trent Reznor is probably the best example, and one of the only musicians who actual GETS how freely downloadable content can make you a rich son of a b***.

There are giant online communities that remix, edit, and distribute all of his songs, completely because Trent has given out the "source code", the raw files to all of his music to his fans so they can do with it as they wish. He has a constant flow of new, downloadable music and content that is devoured constantly by his fans, and has released completely free full length albums via his website, he's making more money now than he ever did using the old, baby-boomer, standard method of milking the consumer.

Google makes money, because when you need to do something, like search the net, or find a cool place on the surface of mars, the first thing you think of is Google.

Musicians and Artists can do the same, the smartest of them are already doing it. Hell I had an artist where their first album was released on a USB key, we put the songs on in loss less form, with lots of other media on the key, a website where if they lose the music they can download the album again, they could freely wipe the usb key clean if they want to, and because they were Samsung USB Keys the entire album release was nearly paid for by Samsung themselves because we bought thousands of USB keys off them. Samsung got to put it's name on some of the content, became a tour sponsor, and the band is making money now.

Keep in mind, Album sales account for almost ZERO of the money an artist makes. Zero ladies and gentlemen, ZERO. It pays off the record execs, that's it. Artists make their money from collateral, swag, and..... touring. All tours are historically paid for directly out of the pocket of the artist. Sure the label fronts the money, but the artist dosn't make a cent of cash until the tour has paid that back. There are exceptions with people like Britney Spears but she is no more a product packaged and sold than a box of cheerios.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in the immediately preceding post are those of encorp and do not reflect the views and/or opinions of family, friends, or anyone remotely associated with encorp unless explicitly stated. encorp does not make any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any liability or responsibility for the quality, factuality or use of information in the immediately preceding post.

Last edited by encorp; May 3, 2009 at 09:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #75 (permalink)  
Old May 3, 2009, 09:48 AM
sswilson's Avatar
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 14,535

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lsorense View Post
No it is more like someone that goes into a book store and reads a book (or part of it) and decides not to buy it.

Many people would simply choose not to buy it in the first place if they weren't sure they would like it. Hence someone that downloads music or games in many cases does go out and actually buy it if they like it, and otherwise they just delete it again. This means that in many cases the people that "steal" it first, become paying customers, while if they hadn't "stolen" it first, they would never have become a customer. Not that the entertainment industry seems to understand that kind of concept.



Well no it isn't. Physical property theft involves the loss of something when someone else gains something. Intellectual property theft does not involve any loss, only a gain. Don't believe the crap from companies that think every illegal copy is equal to one sale that would have happened. Many of those illegal copies in fact result in a future sale, and most others are cases that would simply have done without rather than pay for it. Either way the owner still has their stuff and can still sell it all they want, so they lost nothing.
Again, nothing more than a lame justification for stealing another person's property. It belongs to them, and they get to decide how they want to distribute it. If you don't want it at the price they're offering it for, then quite simply don't use/view it.

What bothers me most about the discussions that go on when the subject of content theft comes up are the lame excuses that folks use in an attempt to legitimize their criminal behaviour.....

I'll freely admit to breaking the law by speeding at times, but when I'm caught I don't get all indignant and start justifying my actions, I did the crime so I'll take my lumps.

Then we have posts like encorp's which point out legitimate complaints about the way intellectual property is marketed. I completely agree with the idea that DRM on products I have purchased more often than not interferes with my fair use rights.

That's where the discussion on piracy should (IMO) be focused.
__________________
MSI Z87I Gaming AC / i5 4670K / 2X 4G Gskill 1866 DDR3 / XFX XTR 750 / EVGA GTX 680 SC+ 2GB / Intel DC S3700 200G / random 160G Sata HDD
Inwin 904 / Swiftech MCP655-b / Alphacool NexXxos XT45 120 Rad / 2X Scythe GT AP-15 / EK Supreme HF / Dell UltraSharp U2412M

Asrock AM1H-ITX / AM1 Athlon 5350 / 2X4G Gskill PC3-14900 / Intel 6235 Wi-Fi / 90W Targus Power Brick / 320G Seagate Momentus / Mini-Box M350 / 1X 22" Dell IPS / 1X 22" HP
Reply With Quote
  #76 (permalink)  
Old May 3, 2009, 10:05 AM
Dave510's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Markham, Ontario
Posts: 276

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sswilson View Post
If they've seen it without paying for it then they've consumed the content of the film. Just as a person who steals a book off of the shelf without paying for it has "consumed" the content thus rendering it's resale value to them greatly lessened even if they later put it back up on the shelf.

And I let it slip by earlier without comment, but I cannot believe that you tried to equate the legality of content piracy with legitimate civil rights battles of the past. Sorry, but there is absolutely no possible way to compare the two outside of a desperate attempt to justify theft of somebody else's property on the backs of those with legitimate complaints against the system.

Theft is theft whether it's physical or intelectual property. If somebody wants you to have something of theirs for free they'll give you access to it. Otherwise, I support bringing the full force of the law in to play for each and every instance of stolen property the criminal has a hand in disseminating.
I'm not equating rebellions against Nazi regimes with intellectual property rights. I'm simply pointing out that legality is not a sufficient nor necessary condition for right or wrong. It was in response to the prevalent opinion in the thread where people simply dismissed the issue at hand by saying "well if it's legal, then it's right, if it's illegal, then it's wrong". Besides, what's being discussed is precisely whether it's right or wrong for some form of sharing when it's currently considered illegal. Just assuming it's wrong because it's illegal begs the question.

I have no trouble understanding what consume means, but my point was that the consumption itself is not tangible. Sure, the resale value to me may have decreased, but then it might also increase (e.g. perhaps I'm interested, but skeptical about a game. Not playing it would have made me not buy it, but playing it and finding that the game was worth the money would make me actually pay for it. In fact, many people brought this point up.), but more importantly, these "values" are not tangible losses. I can't physically sense the "resale value" of these items, and as such nothing tangible is loss. That also means there's no direct loss of money, in comparison to say me eating a steak from a restaurant. You can argue it's an "indirect" loss of money, but once you allow for indirect losses, then it's a slippery slope that's open to all sorts of absurd claims.

The last point you brought up looks at the wish of the person putting the product up for sale. While I agree that it's important to try to respect his wishes, but there are other issues to consider and balance. I've already brought up the issue of misrepresentation. Companies pour in millions to advertise, and I'm sure everyone has been the victim of trailers and demos that made a bad movie/game look great. We declare contracts void when they withhold important clauses, and publicly traded companies are not allowed to only release favorable information about their company in order to attract stockholders, so why exactly is it acceptable for companies with selectively choose what they want consumers to see? Either release no demos/ads/trailers or show the entire thing for free and allow the consumer to choose whether or not it's worth the money. A time based demo (e.g. 30 days before the product gets inactive) is much less misleading than a feature based demo (which almost every single game company and movie studio does).
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #77 (permalink)  
Old May 3, 2009, 10:07 AM
Supergrover's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Okanagan Falls, British Columbia
Posts: 4,248

My System Specs

Default

Oh god thread just Die. Sigh....................
Reply With Quote
  #78 (permalink)  
Old May 3, 2009, 10:10 AM
belgolas's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: St. Thomas Ontario close to london
Posts: 3,936

My System Specs

Default

We are all making good points and hopefully we all can agree that downloading someone's work is illegal. Although artists make like 3% off of albums sold that doesn't mean we shouldn't pay for it. I know I am guilty of stealing music but I really like iTunes where you can just buy one song cause a lot of times I don't like the whole album. Although I do agree that sometimes stealing a song or game can lead to buying it but most don't. I know a lot of teens that don't own a single song and they have hundreds to even thousands. Mostly cause they don't have a credit card. Also you can steal someone's words. Go to school and copy text from someone else and don't give them credit and you will fail.

Now we obviously can't stop pirating because it is human nature so we should look at ways to fight it. One way I think would work is for every game you have to pay a small monthly fee to that game and the entre game is stored on the companies server. I think that might work.
__________________

Sponsor a child!
Fight poverty.

Qoute by Perineum
"ID10T. I just BETCHA he's got 9 toolbars on his web browser right now."
Reply With Quote
  #79 (permalink)  
Old May 3, 2009, 10:37 AM
Dr_BenD_over's Avatar
Fallen Folder
F@H
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,418

My System Specs

Default

Ultimately, this will lead to US releases being delayed in Canada, which will lead to more piracy. It's time to stop treating customers like criminals!
__________________
All's well that's Haswell
Reply With Quote
  #80 (permalink)  
Old May 4, 2009, 03:42 AM
gingerbee's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Posts: 6,828

My System Specs

Default

sorry futures but your just wrong. there is only 1 copyright act in canada. this covers all forms of artistic expression. the reason music is mentioned is becuase that is what the supreme court of Canada set precedents in music first remember napster. and if you can't understand law google is your friend use it cause i am done with this tread. here is another link on what is covered under that act and futures you can interpert that any way you want. talk to your lawer i talk to mine all the time. Copyright Act
__________________
Fav quote "One should strive to achieve; not sit in bitter regret." Ronin Harris
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PC Game Piracy Examined Cranky O/S's, Drivers & General Software 22 February 27, 2009 07:19 AM
DAM Good Deals Added Gav Hardware Canucks Store 8 February 7, 2009 06:36 AM
PC Gaming piracy coming to an end? Sniper Gaming 32 May 28, 2008 07:58 AM
RIAA Slapped Down Again in Piracy Counterclaims Hardware Canucks Press Releases & Tech News 0 May 7, 2008 01:31 PM
Canada, Mexico, Israel Join China, Russia as Countries Plagued by Piracy Babrbarossa Reviews & Articles from the Web 3 February 16, 2007 09:45 AM