Miscellaneous > Intellectual Property & Law
Poll: Music Sharing or Stealing
Faust:
quote:
Who's morality, yours ?
--- End quote ---
What I'm saying Hibee is that you need to back up your arguments with more than "the law says this - so do it."
HibbeeBoy:
quote:Originally posted by Faust:
What I'm saying Hibee is that you need to back up your arguments with more than "the law says this - so do it."
--- End quote ---
I'm not sure how to respond to this because I don't believe I said or implied that but I do kind of go along with the sentiment. ;)
In this case, I do think the law is correct. But by breaking that law (copying/distributing copyright music via the internet) it forces the record industry to change their ways, I'm all for it. It's just not something I would do personally. I don't see why people have a problem paying for a product and the owner of the product protecting their asset.
But I rarely buy music anyway. I have a friends who bootlegs CDs but I never take them because it's shite, like Robbie Williams or Kylie. Stuff I wouldn't have for free let alone buy !!
I don't see what the moral issue is either and by who's morals are we to be observing, yours ? Gods, Allahs ? My granny ?
[ June 13, 2003: Message edited by: HibbeeBoy ]
flap:
The moral issue is the fundamental human right to share, which is being compromised by artists and record labels "protecting their assets", as you misleadingly put it.
quote:I don't see why people have a problem paying for a product
--- End quote ---
Has this not been explained thousands of times before? It is about *freedom* and not price. The issue is not whether or not you pay for music, it's whether or not we are allowed to copy and share.
HibbeeBoy:
quote:Originally posted by flap:
The moral issue is the fundamental human right to share, which is being compromised by artists and record labels "protecting their assets", as you misleadingly put it.
--- End quote ---
The fundamental human right to share, WTF are you on about ?
quote:Originally posted by flap:
Has this not been explained thousands of times before? It is about *freedom* and not price. The issue is not whether or not you pay for music, it's whether or not we are allowed to copy and share.
--- End quote ---
And it has been established that under the present circumstances the artist and their recording company have the right to prevent that happening.
It's not all about YOU.
You can download music free of charge and free of consequence all over the place, certain artists want to restrict that from their work, they want the fundamental right to choose how their work is distributed.
flap:
quote:The fundamental human right to share, WTF are you on about ?
--- End quote ---
I'm on about the funamental right to share. What part of that concept is difficult to understand?
quote:And it has been established that under the present circumstances the artist and their recording company have the right to prevent that happening.
--- End quote ---
No, it has been suggested that they have the right. I disagree.
quote:It's not all about YOU.
--- End quote ---
Again, I disagree, assuming that when you say "YOU" you really mean society, and not me specifically. Your suggestion is that the right of an individual artist to exploit is more important than the right of an entire society to share.
Artists should have every right to stop their work from being distributed full-stop, but if they choose to have it published they they shouldn't have the right to dictate who and who can't listen to/use it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version