So...are you going to download it?

POSTED BY: HanoverFist
UPDATED: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 17:00
VIEWED: 38663
PAGE 12 of 12

PREV PAGE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

HANOVERFIST

Thursday, October 27, 2005 6:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by R1Z:
If I create a chair in my workshop and display it on the front porch, does that entitle you to take control of it?

Is it theft if I go and make an exact duplicate of the chair and do not sell it?

Quote:
Originally posted by R1Z:
When you got married, did you have a commercial photographer take pictures? I have never heard of a commercial photographer selling his negatives as part of the package. He'll sell you as many prints as you want, but not the negative. Commercial photography, and this practice and principle have been around for more than a century.

Yes, and the negatives are sitting in a drawer in my home right now.

Quote:
Originally posted by R1Z:

I would be impressed with a logical argument explaining why someone's private property should become public property, and please don't tell me that it's because this is a digital age and that distribution can't be controlled. That the looting in New Orleans could not be controlled did not make it right. Taking that which does not belong to you is theft, no matter how many people do it.

I agree that theft is wrong. What you have not yet shown is how downloading Serenity under the conditions stated in the original post is theft and wrong. I agree that under current law it is illegal, but can you tell me how it is THEFT or WRONG?

R1Z

Thursday, October 27, 2005 7:32 PM

Quote:
Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by R1Z:
If I create a chair in my workshop and display it on the front porch, does that entitle you to take control of it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is it theft if I go and make an exact duplicate of the chair and do not sell it?

This is a discussion of downloading, not plagiarism. In my field (architecture) designs are not copyrighted, documents are.

If you make a chair that is as exact a copy as you can make it, it is still a chair that is your work product. You made it. There are two chairs, your chair is LIKE my chair, but it is not MY chair. You may hire actors and make a movie as like Serenity as you possibly can, and I will have no quibble with you. Joss and Universal may, but that's a whole other issue. What you may not do is acquire their work product without their permission.

Quote:
I agree that theft is wrong. What you have not yet shown is how downloading Serenity under the conditions stated in the original post is theft and wrong. I agree that under current law it is illegal, but can you tell me how it is THEFT or WRONG?

I am so glad to hear we agree on one point, that acquiring another's property without consent is wrong.

1.)Work product belongs to the person who did the work, unless other contractual arrangements have been made. (Your work product made on company time and premises may belong, contractually, to your employer.) Acquiring it without permission is theft.

2.)Downloading Serenity under any circumstances is wrong until such time as the the owners make it available for download. Doing so without consent removes control from the owner.

3.)The fact that you intend to make compensation later is an argument in your favor, but not a compelling one. First, you have deprived the owner of control over the process. Second, our system of retail commerce is predicated on payment first, merchandise after, unless you have an established relationship with the seller (an account) and the seller OKs the transaction. If Joss OKs the download, fine, but then he will have retained control over the transaction. Third, Compensation is not a complete remedy for theft. If you embezzle funds from your company and are caught, reimbursement later is likely to be part of the penalty, but it does not wipe out the illegal act. You will still have stolen the funds, first. Compensating Joss after the fact will not mitigate the fact that you took his work product without his permission.

AFTER, and only after, you have purchased the DVD, you may make backup copies in accordance with the standard fair use principles, and you and your guests may watch the content an infinite number of times. You may not send copies out into the world, that privilege is reserved to the owners, and you may not charge your guests for the privilege of watching the content.

To enjoy the flavor of life, take big bites. Moderation is for monks. --Robt. Heinlein

JONGIBBS

Wednesday, November 23, 2005 4:50 PM

I have a suggestion for those people who are adamant that they are doing nothing wrong by downloading the movie. Why don't you send a letter/e-mail to those nice people at Universal?
You can explain what you've done and why it's okay. I'm sure we'd all love to hear about what happens after that.

R1Z

Wednesday, November 23, 2005 5:00 PM

Quote:
BitTorrent shakes hands with MPAA 11:04AM
BitTorrent has shaken hands with the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and has agreed to try to help stem the amount of illegal downloads of movies and other digital content through its site. As a result of the agreement, BitTorrent will work to remove any copyright material that appears in its search engine.
The announcement was made by Bram Cohen, the founder and chief executive of BitTorrent, alongside Dan Glickman, chairman of the MPAA at a news conference in Los Angeles.

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/80600/bittorrent-shakes-hands-with-mpaa.ht
ml

Apparently, even the creator of BitTorrent has conceded that taking what is not yours is wrong . . .

To enjoy the flavor of life, take big bites. Moderation is for monks. --Robt. Heinlein

PREV PAGE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12