File Sharing

[kchenault]

One more thing. Should I, as a consumer, have more copyrights when I buy something? Meaning, should some of the copyright transfer to me since I have paid for the item. Or am I just paying for the use of the "intellectual property" and I actually own the worthless piece of plastic that holds it?

 

Hmmmmmm....

[Martial_Artist]

I already mentioned radio. The artists are getting their royalties from the station. A copied song from the radio isn't near as good as quality as an original. But that doesn't really matter.

 

I don't have cable, either. I really don't watch much tv.

 

I agree the government doesn't do a good job of detailing what the copyright law is. I read the 500 page copyright law once. The most boring thing I have ever read. It's not very clear on a lot of things. It's really vague, because it's trying to protect something not really tangible: creative thoughts and ideas. So in its purpose it is flawed, I'll agree.

 

There are no speculations about media types in the law, that I know of--500 pages is a lot and I don't remember every little thing. But it's the media types that are prosecuted. With TV and televised programs most companies don't care because they have been compensated and the quality of recorded media isn't as great as original. Most people that record a movie off of tv eventually buy the original anyways. As for NFL, I do believe you're not supposed to record them, but no one is going to prosecute you if you do.

 

See, my point was, it is black and white from a moral standpoint. It's theft. Sure, you probably won't ever get prosecuted, but does that make it right?

 

As far as what is chosen to be prosecuted or what they choose to defend legally, that's a very grey area. If they start to lose money in they'll prosecute. That's why they're pretty strict on DVD's and VHS's. Most of them have anti-copying protection anyways. It's something they want to protect. I feel that's what's going to happen in the music industry.

 

With books it's a little harder. Much more stuff to copy or duplicate and it will hardly ever look like the original. With music, you can copy from a CD and get the same quality. It hits a little closer to home for the musicians. IF one site buys CD's and then copies them and gives them away from free, or even just the sharing, why would anyone want to buy a CD from the store? You can copy all the songs you want and burn your own CD.

 

That's really just it. I'm not trying to be analytical about it all. Just sharing my view of it. I'm a writer and I wouldn't want anyone copying my work and distributing it without any compesation or permission. Would you?

 

I know the musicians make millions as it is and for now the impact isn't that great, but who's to say what the future will do?

 

That's all. Thanks for the discussion.

 

MA.

[kchenault]

I wasn't arguing the moral side, there I agree. I was trying to get the idea across that greed is what decides the issue.

 

As for it not being right. Copying is copying, so anyone who owns a vcr and uses it for recording purposes is in the wrong, quality not withstanding.

 

Thanks for the civil conversation on a controversial topic MA. It's how it should be.

[Tombstone]

I still don't see it as being black and white. Its still sharing no matter if you know who your sharing it with or not. The main difference between P2P and burning a cd for a friend is the amount of people that you share with on P2P.

 

And on a separate note, you would think that companies other than music companies would have done something. Example, Microsoft. Their programs are hundreds of dollars sometimes and you can download them for free. Product keys doesn't matter either because of key generators.

 

One of two things will happen when individuals get sued. It will scare people away from P2P programs, or bigger and better P2P programs will be made that hide your true identity better.

 

Just rambling a little

[Martial_Artist]

Kchen,

 

As for copyright transfering to the consumer, that doesn't happen. The copyright basically says the creator of the idea has the ownership. When you buy a CD you're buying the plastic and paying a royalty to the artist. The rights of the CD still belong to the artist/copyright holder.

 

Tombstone,

 

Let's say you write something down that everybody likes. You decide to sell it. But first you copyright it. Now you have protection against people stealing your idea, because you have protected the copy rights. Now, let's say that someone gets ahold of your idea and copies onto another piece of paper and gives it to his friend. Your idea is spreading but you're not getting paid for it. How would you feel?

 

That's the nature of the copyright laws. To protect the rights of the artists. It's the nature of the business for writers, musicians, and others who sell ideas or intellectual property. It's the only protection they have for their way of life.

 

Sharing something that isn't yours, or that you don't have the rights to share is wrong. It doesn't matter how many people it reaches.

 

Now, the ramifications of this are small. You likely won't be prosecuted for copying a CD and giving it to your friend. But as more people do this the market will be affected and the artists will have to charge more to make up for the flooding of their markets with product they didn't receive compensation for.

 

It's still black and white. It's stealing. However, the laws aren't black and white about it, because they focus mainly on people making money off another's work. The parts on distribution without permission/compensation are vague.

 

As for Microsoft, they have one of the hardest hitting anti-piracy groups in their company. They actively hunt down and prosecute software pirates. When I used to work for a large computer sales company the Microsoft software license sales were what they drilled into us. The licenses had to be bought and suspects were prosecuted. In fact Microsoft offered a huge spiff for information pertaining to suspected pirates.

 

Their stuff is still pirated even with their strict security measures. That's why their stuff is hundreds of dollars. They are in the business of making as much money as possible. Since they lose a huge amount to piracy they make up for it by inflated prices.

 

Just something to think about.

 

MA.

[Fenris-wolf]

Hey, Martial_Artist... What do you write?

[Martial_Artist]

Books(fantasy fiction and sci-fi, as well as a language book I'm working on-Tagalog) and freelance magazine articles. I also do copywriting and editing for local college students. When one of my novels goes big I'll let you know. I was thinking about a martial arts book. I have had several people actually suggest I do, and that it would fill a nitch in the market. It's still something I'm playing with in my mind. Thanks for asking.

 

MA.

[Fenris-wolf]

Yay you, I love fantasy/sci-fi! What kind of fantasy (heroic fantasy is usually my forte) do you write? I was introduced to fantasy at eleven and it's pretty much all I read with periodic forays into sci-fi/ mystery/ comedy/ whatever takes my fancy.

 

Are any of your books published? It kinda sucks that I'd never find any of them since I live in this little backwater...

 

A martial arts book would be interesting, do you feel you have the expertese (sp?? ) to write something like that? Or would it be fictional?

[Martial_Artist]

Epic fantasy, and character driven sci-fi. I have some books in the works for publishing, and when they're done I'll let you know. In fact, I'll be sending some anyways to my friends in New Zealand. They're waiting patiently.

 

I think what I have to say about the martial arts would make for a good book. It wouldn't be fictional. But I still haven't decided yet.