Torrents Bad or good?

[CelticPredator]

whether you keep it or not... if you've watched copyrighted material, outside of regular broadcast channels and without paying for it, it's theft.

Hence why, stealing is awesome.

 

[Blackthornone]

Intellectual property law would disagree that only physical objects can be stolen.

You have a world class gift for moral evasion.

People don't have a right to be rich.
If they do it ethically, that is ok, but no one has a right to wealth.

Moral evasion is saying any contract regardless of morality must be enforced and anything is ok in the name of profit, like Manifest Destiny.
Obviously, if your primary agenda is to get rich without constantly providing value, you would want to defend the ability of people to make profits by simply making copies of something at next to no cost, but you would be appalled if someone else would be able to make copies of what you sell, with THEIR raw materials, as cheaply as you so they don't have to pay you for it.

I'm an isolationist and think that something should always be made as locally as possible with whatever design is best from wherever.
When everyone shares ideas freely, the whole world benefits, by maximizing exposure to good ideas which can be constantly improved by anyone, for the eventual good of all. That is promoting maximum quality of human life.
People who simply want to get rich and have more than others by forcing them to pay more than it costs them to make it themselves are captains of moral evasion.
It's exploitation of people for personal financial gain, at the expense of the maximum good of the world.

For example, I think if someone can make Porsches cheaper than they can buy them from Porsche, they should make them themselves.
Because of the economy of scale, that usually isn't possible.

I prefer authentic items, myself, which is why I spent over $1500 on music CDs in my life. No digital copies.
I like the original art and the value that an original item holds.
Also, printed magazines have far better image quality than computer scans, so again, I prefer to buy the real magazine, even with the greater cost, because it would cost me more to make my own printed magazine at the same level of quality that I could buy.

The golden age of music recording profits was with vinyl. Vinyl is expensive to make, and cost prohibitive for the do it yourselfer.

When CDs were invented, because they are inherently so cheap, that spelled the end of the exclusivity of music recordings.
The industry had to know that. They produced a cheaper item and charged twice as much for it.
Then they charged even more. Had they not fleeced the consumer for so long, perhaps downloading music wouldn't be so popular.

They complain of people exploiting the system, but they are more guilty of it than anyone.

 

[Blackthornone]

There is a big difference between video released to YouTube, ect.. and something you watch streamed on an illegal site or download illegally. One still provides revenue to the people who created the video where the other doesn't. The less revenue shows and movies and make due to piracy the less movies and shows will exist. And yes this will eventually effect every movie and show.

The movies used to be very profitable, before they actually sold copies and people had to go to the movies to see them, like the Disney films.
I think that is where the penalty should be levied. On bootleggers who sell for profit.

 

[Lejuan]

Hence why, stealing is awesome.

I'm not making a value judgement, just saying crows ought to call it for what it is - theft But I don't buy the line that piracy harms the industry to a significant extent. If piracy is the massive problem license holders in the film and broadcast industry and others claim it to be, they'd have moved in a similar direction to the music industry: make content readily available on a solid platform for a reasonable price and punters will be inclined to pay for it instead of steal it. The fact that they haven't makes me suspect that they're doing well enough out of the current model.

Not every punter who steals content would otherwise have paid for it, and many who steal it will subsequently purchase legitimate copies for the superior quality and features.

 

[devilof76]

Reverend, keep shovelling.

 

[Intruder04]

Torrents is good.

 

[Wulf]

I don't see piracy as theft. To me theft is when you take something away from someone and they don't own it anymore. Piracy is basically just making a copy out of the original (or really, out of a copy actually) without taking away the original from the owner. The only question that matters is if piracy hurts the original owner, theft hurts the original owner since their property is taken from them. But piracy? From what I've read, the movie industry isn't dying out.. on the contrary, it's just growing and more movies are made today than ever before.. with movies making millions of dollars some even hitting the billion dollar mark. It's a growing industry, no doubt and piracy isn't hurting it.

My experience of living in a country where everyone downloads and talks about it openly as if it wasn't illegal, where we have a political party called Piratpartiet (The Pirate Party) which advocates "the individual's right to privacy, both on the Internet and in everyday life" which gained 2 seats out of 20 for Sweden in the EU parliament, the people who download, because honestly everyone I know does it.. most of them support the industry one way or another. By buying movies, going to the theater, buying video games and consoles etc. The people who don't, they can't afford buying every single movie.. or paying the high prices for cable tv in Sweden + the idiotic license fee for owning a TV, computer and smartphone. But they still have the right to some entertainment in life, it's not like the industry is losing out on profit since these people wouldn't be able to pay for it anyway.

I personally buy games, blu-rays, books and music regularly. I have a collection of over 200 blu-rays and I had many more DVD's back in the day. I also pay for netflix and spotify, which in my opinion aren't that great to be honest.. but I remember when I didn't have a job or income.. I downloaded the **** out of the pirate bay. We were kids, teenagers... we took our entertainment chances when we could and we had a blast. I bet many of those who download around the world are just teenagers with no income.

So, I don't view piracy as wrong as long as you can't afford it because it's not profit the industry is losing out on. It's just an easy way for people to entertain themselves in a world that for many probably is boring and lonely.

I wonder what will happen to the industry of physical objects, since for now piracy has only hit everything digital, with the advancement of 3D printers. People will be able to print out cars, weapons, statues, furniture.. you name it (and some already have). Will be interesting to see in the future when everyone has a 3D printer in their homes.

"You wouldn't steal a car?"
-No but I would download it if I could!

 

[Darth Snoopy]

​

 

[Wulf]

^

 

[Lejuan]

...and yet after all these years the good ship Film n' Broadcast is still afloat.

 

[ShadowX81]

Are you stealing from the Louvre if you do a Google image search for "Mona Lisa"?

 

[devilof76]

Not a valid analogy.

People don't have a right to be rich.
If they do it ethically, that is ok, but no one has a right to wealth.

And by ethically, you mean according to your ethics. With your permission, they can get rich.

(Which is a load of bull. Par for the course...)

Moral evasion is saying any contract regardless of morality must be enforced and anything is ok in the name of profit, like Manifest Destiny.

Psychologically, evasion is the denial of reality. A moral evasion is a denial of facts which suggest a flaw in one's moral reasoning.

Manifest Destiny was a policy which required moral evasion on the part of the individuals in the U.S. government that advocated it. It was opposed by the people who were making legitimate profits in this country, and it was exploited by those who sought to fake their profits.

So no, it wasn't done in the name of profit. And yes, you evade like a rug.

Obviously, if your primary agenda is to get rich without constantly providing value, you would want to defend the ability of people to make profits by simply making copies of something at next to no cost

It would seem to me that the number of people seeking to acquire copies without paying for it would indicate that there is value in providing copies.

but you would be appalled if someone else would be able to make copies of what you sell, with THEIR raw materials, as cheaply as you so they don't have to pay you for it.

Those raw materials are worthless without the content which the artists provide; content which they contract with corporations to produce and distribute copies of.

I'm an isolationist and think that something should always be made as locally as possible with whatever design is best from wherever.

Good for you.

When everyone shares ideas freely, the whole world benefits, by maximizing exposure to good ideas which can be constantly improved by anyone, for the eventual good of all. That is promoting maximum quality of human life.

Are you aware that it takes work to produce ideas? Is there a reason why you are opposed to valuable work being rewarded? Did you know that humans invented money for that purpose?

Other people receive a maximization of their life quality, and the person who provided it gets...reimbursed the cost of raw materials? How generous of humanity.

People who simply want to get rich and have more than others by forcing them to pay more than it costs them to make it themselves are captains of moral evasion.

That's a lie.

Pricing higher than what people are willing to pay for what they desire is not a use of force. Customers are more than free to not purchase at the offered price.

And there is no evasion. Businesses know that they are providing value above and beyond the cost of raw materials, and they charge accordingly. If you are assuming that there is no value beyond said costs, then enjoy your blank cd's. Did you know that you can buy them for less than one with someone's music recorded on it?

It's exploitation of people for personal financial gain, at the expense of the maximum good of the world.

You mean they aren't allowing you to exploit them for the sake of your mission to provide the ideal quality of life to everyone who demands it.

For example, I think if someone can make Porsches cheaper than they can buy them from Porsche, they should make them themselves.

Should they also steal the designs created by Porsche?

Because of the economy of scale, that usually isn't possible.

Because it is not their achievement, that always isn't moral (and yes, by my personal standards: you don't have a right to what is not yours).

The golden age of music recording profits was with vinyl. Vinyl is expensive to make, and cost prohibitive for the do it yourselfer.

When CDs were invented, because they are inherently so cheap, that spelled the end of the exclusivity of music recordings.
The industry had to know that. They produced a cheaper item and charged twice as much for it.
Then they charged even more. Had they not fleeced the consumer for so long, perhaps downloading music wouldn't be so popular.

Fleeced? If they were paying what they felt was too much, whose fault was that?

CD's have many features that make them superior to vinyl. They presently cost less than the vinyl produced today. The cost more at the time because the market for them was limited. New technology, etc.

And this is why you legitimize the theft of the artists' music? Because the industry owed the listeners for the music they already bought?

Explain to me how this might make sense to someone who is not evading on a massive scale.

They complain of people exploiting the system, but they are more guilty of it than anyone.

A fine rationalization for the crooked and envious. But, whatever works for you...

 

[CelticPredator]

I stole the Mona Lisa, and replaced it with copy.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uMBbkSMppM[/ame]

 

[devilof76]

Imagine you sell cars, and people are acquiring the cars you sell by copying the ones that people with integrity bought.

 

[crows]

whether you keep it or not... if you've watched copyrighted material, outside of regular broadcast channels and without paying for it, it's theft.

There is a big difference between video released to YouTube, ect.. and something you watch streamed on an illegal site or download illegally. One still provides revenue to the people who created the video where the other doesn't. The less revenue shows and movies and make due to piracy the less movies and shows will exist. And yes this will eventually effect every movie and show.

well,
let me give you an example. you can go to the public Library and you can check out dvds. you can watch movies that way.

Is that theft? (this is not a sarcastic question, it is a serious question)

My eyes are able to watch the information being transmitted from the TV screen, and then I return the movie. I watched something but didn't buy it.
Makes me wonder, is that stealing?

I am not trying to defend stealing or anything. But At least if you watch something on those websites you are not downloading it.

Isn't there a difference between stealing something and just Watching something? (My Library has 3 seasons of Breaking bad. I watch them often)
I mean, is watching something on those sites the same thing as downloading a torrent?

 

[Wulf]

Imagine people could print out cars, why would you sell them at all?

 

[devilof76]

Can they design the cars as well? Or is operating a printer the extent of their abilities?

 

[crows]

Imagine people could print out cars, why would you sell them at all?

There is a guy using a 3D printer for a car... (kind of)

https://www.gizmag.com/3d-print-aston-martin-db4-replica/28518/

 

[devilof76]

Do 3d printers make good engine blocks?

 

[Wulf]

Yes, people can design cars, be it based on existing cars or not. They can put them up for others to download and print for free or they can charge a fee. But 3D printing out a car wouldn't be easy, lots of different material would be needed and the skill to put it together. Fully printing out a functional car is not exactly around the corner, yet. The profit to be made is in supplying the printing material and helping putting it together. But now we're just going into details which in this case of cars is different, take another example of a surfing board for an example.. that would be easy to print out. No electronics involved.