Outkast - Hey Ya.mp3
Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago
261–270 of 350 posts
Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago
#262Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
What rights did you used to have?
We used to have the right to copy whatever we wanted and be accountable to no one. That all went away in 1790 when the U.S. government passed the first Copyright Act. https://www.copyright.gov/timeline/timeline_18th_century.htm...
Reviewing this a bit more, it was actually the 1710 Statute of Anne in Great Britain that took away our rights to copy whatever we wanted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Anne
Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was reading parents comment with a bit of cynicism until I tried suno and I believe we are going to see significant garnishing of wages in creative field https://suno.com/song/dc950e10-6bbe-4649-8cdb-7a4d81762aae
I believe we are going to see significant garnishing of wages in creative field A wage garnishment is any legal or equitable procedure through which some portion of a person's earnings is required to be withheld for the payment of a debt. Most garnishments are made by court order. You think because of auto generated music there are going to be court orders to take money out of the paychecks of people in 'creative fie…
Reduced wages then shall we
Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago
#265Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago
#266I am still using Soulseek.
Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago
#267Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait, what? There are so many assumptions packed into this statement. Why should we view things through the lens of whether we are glorifying pirates or not? Is your assertion we should be condemning them? Why? Is it because they are taking bread out of the mouths of musicians? Is it equally bad if Spotify uses their leverage to commoditize and devalue music so musicians can no longer make meaningful money from recor…
First, when someone uses "many" and "most", it indicates they are avoiding "a black and white view," by acknowledging there are some exceptions. As to the main point, no individual has the right to take someone else's intellectual property (such as songs, movies, books, etc that were often created by large teams of people over months or years) and, without asking any permission, "liberate" that content so that it can…
Copyright impedes accessibility, an important human right. The “pirates” sometimes “liberate” content that has no hope of being released due to a snarl of copyright and artificial regional restrictions.
For example: audio description. Audio description is an accessibility technology that allows people who are blind or low vision to watch films, essentially by providing an extra soundtrack with a narrator concisely providing context for what's going on that can't be accounted for by dialogue or sound effects.
I have owned, in my life, 5 copies of the film Alien. None of those versions are audio described. Up until last year there was no way to hear a described version without resorting to “piracy”. The only way to hear a (mediocre version with a synth voice instead of an expressive human one) described version is to pretend to be in Canada, or attend a theatre capable of delivering AD with the new re-release. It's not a world-wide release.
So, sitting here in a cow-paddock in rural Western Australia, I still have no legal way to watch the audio described version of an oscar-winning film over 40 years old. Having paid 5 times for it, damn right I pirate that. And while I am not vision impaired, there are many others who are who depend on AD to participate in culture, and when they find barriers to that, they pirate that content too.
I have films on DVD I paid for, but cannot legally watch because I'm too many kilometers from some notional border or other. Damn right I “pirated” those!
As to your main point, you note that no individual has the right to take someone else's intellectual property. I presume you are giving your ethical blessing and a free pass to OpenAI and Midjourney et. al. who have provably leveraged a pirated corpus into highly profitable products?
Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
already, Disney has been censoring past episodes not even based on today's sensibilities but it seems purely based on keywords. there's an episode of the suite life of zach and cody where zach pretends to have dyslexia in order to get extra time in his exams, and near the end of the episode he gets busted and they have a thoughtful conversation about how it's unfair and hurts the people who need the extra time, and h…
Disney is only slightly better about nuking old “offensive” content than other providers. Many times they just gave an unskippable “this is culturally offensive to some” text and call it good. For example the old lady and the tramp has that “we are Siamese” song, which I guess is offensive… at least they still let you watch it. Hulu on the other hand just pulls shit. For example they pulled my favorite it’s always su…
I guess that means Hulu doesn't have Tropic Thunder?
Re: Napster sparked a file-sharing revolution 25 years ago
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
Presumably if you're pirating music you aren't "completely detached" from the music - otherwise why would you do it?
Hoarding. I’m half joking but all these tools to automatically download TVs and movies has absolutely led to this class of user that habitually downloads stuff just for the sake of doing it. Terabytes of movies they have no interest in. The psychology of it fascinates me.
The answers for content for which I have interest revolve around cost, availability, quality, and convenience.
For everything else (a minority): an excuse to play with my servers, cosplaying as an archivist, and "number must go up" for NAS size :)