Miscellaneous > Intellectual Property & Law
Does this make me a criminal?
flap:
quote:Originally posted by Laukev7:
For the last time, movies / music / paintings are NOT information. They are pieces of art. Don't compare apples and oranges.
--- End quote ---
They may not be functional in nature, but they still constitute information. But whether you call them 'information' or 'art' is irrelevant - the point still stands that they are all infintely replicable artefacts, and so (for non-commercial redistribution purposes at least) can be treated equally.
slave:
quote:Originally posted by Laukev7:
For the last time, movies / music / paintings are NOT information. They are pieces of art. Don't compare apples and oranges.
--- End quote ---
From dictonary.reference.com:
in
slave:
quote:Originally posted by flap:
They may not be functional in nature, but they still constitute information. But whether you call them 'information' or 'art' is irrelevant - the point still stands that they are all infintely replicable artefacts, and so (for non-commercial redistribution purposes at least) can be treated equally.
--- End quote ---
Good point, very true. The fact that something is copy-able is the important thing to consider here. If physical items were easily copied and there were laws against doing so, we would be having a discussion about that.
slave:
quote:Originally posted by xeen:
If I want to see the movie that I paid for yesterday again, the MPAA expects me to go to the theater and pay again. So by downloading it, I'm not giving them the $10 that I would have otherwise. However, there are 2 flaws in this assumption:
1. Why should they assume that I would in fact go to the theater and see the movie a second time? Actually, I definately wouldn't. So they're not getting the money either way so I'm not imposing any financial damage on them.
2. What about when the DVD comes out? Say I go buy the DVD and loan it (loan, not copy) to some friend of mine. Then they are loosing the money that he/she would have otherwise paid to rent it. However it is not illegal to loan your possessions to your friends and they have no way of keeping you from doing so. So why should it be any different before the dvd is released?
And once again, how can they assume that my friend would even bother renting the dvd if I hadn't loaned it to him. Maybe he's poor and can't afford it. So again, they're not loosing any money. And actually in this case we're helping the MPAA by promoting a good movie. The more people who watch it, the more likely it is they will want to see a similar movie in the future.
--- End quote ---
All good points. I especially like #2. I'm glad you realize what brain-dead logic they use. ;)
Laukev7:
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
Main Entry: 2art
Pronunciation: '
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version