Poll: Music Sharing or Stealing

[billy_gates]

Do you consider downloading music off the net or with apps such as Kazzaa to be "Sharing" or "Stealing."


I consider it Stealing.

[KernelPanic]

Since I don't want any RIAA trash I can call it stealing.

[Laukev7]

Stealing. There is no ssuch thing as "sharing" music.

[flap]

Stealing: "To take (the property of another) without right or permission"

Since no *property* has been *taken*, it's ridiculous that you call it "stealing". Even if you believe it's unethical to copy without permission, to call it "stealing" is to use a faulty analogy. So to summarise, your question really is "Do you think it's wrong to share?"

[HibbeeBoy]

It's a grey area but I lean towards the "stealing"  because it's not really sharing if you duplicate and the item in question is copyright protected. I find it interesting though how far this "stealing/sharing" concept can go.

[HibbeeBoy]

quote:Originally posted by Laukev:
Stealing. There is no ssuch thing as "sharing" music.

I think there is, if you buy a CD and lend it to someone you could call that sharing. If you invite a friend to listen to the CD that could be termed sharing. Maybe that's where these nuts are going, "Only one person at a time may listen to this recording !!!"  

[flap]

quote:it's not really sharing if you duplicate and the item in question is copyright protected.

How does that make it "not sharing"? That may make it illegal, but it doesn't mean it's "stealing". Even if you don't agree with it, you can't just apply random propaganda terms to make it sound worse than it is. You may as well call it "rape" or "genocide".

[Refalm]

Trading.

In some countries, it's legal to give a copy of music to someone if that someone gives a copy in return. I think, this is exactly what P2P programs do.

[HibbeeBoy]

quote:Originally posted by flap:


How does that make it "not sharing"? That may make it illegal, but it doesn't mean it's "stealing". Even if you don't agree with it, you can't just apply random propaganda terms to make it sound worse than it is. You may as well call it "rape" or "genocide".

It is a grey area but if the recording is copyright protected, then that is just what it says, you may not copy the recording and distribute it under the guise of "sharing". So under these conditions, I would call it stealing.

[flap]

Yes, I know it's *illegal*, and you may even (wrongly) believe that it's unethical, but that doesn't mean it can be called stealing.

[suselinux]

I am going to send you all ear plugs so that you can't hear my stereo.  I don't want to get you in trouble for stealing.

[HibbeeBoy]

quote:Originally posted by flap:
Yes, I know it's *illegal*, and you may even (wrongly) believe that it's unethical, but that doesn't mean it can be called stealing.

By your own definition (Stealing: "To take (the property of another) without right or permission ") I think it could be termed stealing. The owner of the property remains the recording artist and there are terms attached to the sale of his/her work.
I do see what you are getting at but at the same time I don't agree that duplicating and distributing (free or otherwise) an artists work is "sharing".

[flap]

It's not their property - it's a series of 1s and 0s. They may have designed that series of data but they don't "own" every copy and even every rendition of it. If I play a copyrighted CD and someone listens to it outside my window (without themselves paying for it), are they stealing?

And whether you agree with it or not, it *is* sharing.

[HibbeeBoy]

quote:Originally posted by flap:
It's not their property - it's a series of 1s and 0s. They may have designed that series of data but they don't "own" every copy and even every rendition of it. If I play a copyrighted CD and someone listens to it outside my window (without themselves paying for it), are they stealing?

And whether you agree with it or not, it *is* sharing.

It's not artists property ? Because YOU say so ? I think the recoding artist would disagree, not all but most commercial artists.

You may take ownership of the media the recording is physically on, but you do not have ownership or  the right to copy and distribute the recording (or whatever)so once you cross that line, then you are no longer sharing, you are possibly stealing.

As for you analogy for someone listening outside your window, don't be absurd. However, if you  play that recording at a club or something, then someone is going to want to get paid.

[flap]

quote:As for you analogy for someone listening outside your window, don't be absurd. However, if you play that recording at a club or something, then someone is going to want to get paid.

How can you see the absurdity of one thing but not the other?