Earlier quoted context omitted.
Copyright is but the idea of copyright isn't.
There is no idea of copyright distinct from copyright. o_O.
There is a definition of copyright and the question is whether that definition can be said to apply to digital.
Send Them Your Money: A Campaign to Send The RIAA/MPAA Billions
111–120 of 135 posts
Re: Send Them Your Money: A Campaign to Send The RIAA/MPAA Billions
#112Does anyone know how the japanese judge story [2] and the german trickster Till Eulenspiegel [2] are related ? I knew the story as an adventure of Till Eulenspiegel.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%8Coka_Tadasuke#Famous_cases
Re: Send Them Your Money: A Campaign to Send The RIAA/MPAA Billions
#113Very creative and thought provoking, but wrong. A DVD version of avatar sells for say $20 and Riaa gets some percentage of that. Joe blow downloads avatar for free from google or some other website, ptp or sneakernet. Joe blow sends the riaa some percentage of $20 in photocopied money. That does not provide the same utility for riaa as the avatar.mp4 did for Joe blow. Whether or not Joe blow's download of avatar for…
Whether or not Joe blow's download of avatar for free is unfair against the store that stocks the DVD, the trucker who moved it, the actors, producers and supporting staff or the media ads that promoted it is another question. Ummm no. If Joe downloads avatar for free, he is not ripping off anyone who may have been involved in the production, distribution and sale of a DVD - he is ripping off those involved in the pr…
Then is it okay to pirate software too? For instance, is it okay for me to pirate all the apps from Mac App Store since I didn't steal any physical copies?
Re: Send Them Your Money: A Campaign to Send The RIAA/MPAA Billions
#114IANAL. Is it illegal to photocopy money and send it? Or, is it just illegal to use the photocopied money?
It may also depend on which part of the world you are in...
Re: Send Them Your Money: A Campaign to Send The RIAA/MPAA Billions
#115Re: Send Them Your Money: A Campaign to Send The RIAA/MPAA Billions
#116Very creative and thought provoking, but wrong. A DVD version of avatar sells for say $20 and Riaa gets some percentage of that. Joe blow downloads avatar for free from google or some other website, ptp or sneakernet. Joe blow sends the riaa some percentage of $20 in photocopied money. That does not provide the same utility for riaa as the avatar.mp4 did for Joe blow. Whether or not Joe blow's download of avatar for…
I'll take the pirated 1080p version that doesn't have unskipable adverts, copy protection, and the extra commentary track. I don't care about any of the "extra features" that Hollywood seems to sprinkle into every DVD. Their business model is broken, but they are not going to go down without a fight.
I always find it funny that they force the legit users to sit through all that rubbish, having paid good money to watch the movie, yet the pirates skip through all that. I particularly hate the DVDs that force me to watch the trailers for upcoming releases. Come on, if I wanted to watch trailers then I'd go to the cinema! :)
Re: Send Them Your Money: A Campaign to Send The RIAA/MPAA Billions
#117Here is some low fidelity ascii money: http://www.retrojunkie.com/asciiart/money/bills.txt Think of it as mp3 money.
I need some British money.
Failing that, some Nyan Cat money!
Re: Send Them Your Money: A Campaign to Send The RIAA/MPAA Billions
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
An introductory text - thank you, but I've taken microeconomics in college. After carefully considering both points of view, I tend to rather agree with Smith, for the following simple reason. Suppose the more frivolous uses of water were somehow restricted. (There are cities that do pass such regulations sometimes.) Its marginal utility would increase, but its price would most likely drop, due to lower demand. Alter…
> Suppose the more frivolous uses of water were somehow restricted. Then you would no longer have a free market; people would be prohibited from engaging in transactions that they would have chosen to engage in without the prohibition. In that case, yes, price is no longer equal to marginal utility. > Alternatively, consider that blood plasma and many life-saving medicines that have no other use are still cheaper tha…
> Then you would no longer have a free market;
Additionally, (and this is a point I argue with those proposing wholly market-based solutions to public education) a theorized free exchange with unshackled supply/demand curves assumes perfect information, which we don't have. (In this case, partly due to the long tail of attention.)
Re: Send Them Your Money: A Campaign to Send The RIAA/MPAA Billions
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. Imho this argument that copying is not stealing does a real disservice to the cause. No, you're not stealing a thing when you copy it, but you are stealing the utility that it confers, be it entertainment, knowledge or whatever, that you would otherwise have had to pay for. You're taking value and not compensating for it, aka theft. This is so transparent and obvious a flaw in the assertion that no trained la…
This particular trained lawyer wishes that we could never talk about whether copyright infringement is stealing, ever again. It's 100% legally irrelevant. There are laws against stealing physical property. Copyright infringement doesn't violate them. There are laws against copyright infringement. Copyright infringement does violate them. The question of whether "stealing" is good shorthand for "copyright infringement…
I wish I could upvote this more.
Thank you.
Re: Send Them Your Money: A Campaign to Send The RIAA/MPAA Billions
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no idea of copyright distinct from copyright. o_O.
There is a definition of copyright and the question is whether that definition can be said to apply to digital.
I'm not sure you understand the context -- for that matter, your terse replies make it hard to know what you think you're saying. But to respond anyways: there is a legal definition of the idea of copyright and the question is pretty well-settled whether that definition applies to digital works. There is no philosophical definition of copyright, for the reasons that I said above -- it's hard to regard it as an issue in philosophy.