This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Weekly Debate #1.1: File Sharing
Return to board index
Post by
Random0098
Alright, here is what could potentially be a better topic of discussion than the Wednesday sport topic - that was lame. I have a feeling that a lot of people here might favor a particular side to this debate, but I'd like to see if some people will chose to argue the other side.
Should unregulated distribution of copyrighted works over Internet be allowed?
What is your position on this question, and why?
Post by
Queggy
No.
Why? Because first it's against the law. Why is it against the law? Because if people just take something, how are the creators of said file supposed to support themselves? Maybe that is their job to create that file? How would you feel if you payed lots of money and spent years of your life to create something that everyone will enjoy and to perfect said thing. And then someone comes along and steals it and starts giving it out for free?
Post by
mudfish
No.
Why? Because first it's against the law. Why is it against the law? Because if people just take something, how are the creators of said file supposed to support themselves? Maybe that is their job to create that file? How would you feel if you payed lots of money and spent years of your life to create something that everyone will enjoy and to perfect said thing. And then someone comes along and steals it and starts giving it out for free?
QFT
Post by
Slimda
I support file sharing.
Just because you made a hit-song, doesn't mean you and your company should be paid for the next 20 years.
I gladly download songs, computergames, movies, books, you name it. I download whatever I want to, and whenever I want to.
However, whenever I stumble upon something that I find
good
, I support it. How? Going to concerts, buying the game for extra content and free patches, buy the book and other books by the author, etc.
To put it in another angle. How much does it hurt Britney Spears' paycheck that I choose to download her album, and then delete it because it's utter crap?
Absolutely nothing.
Artists makes the most money out of concerts and gigs, and t-shirts and caps and such merchandise. CDs are just a way of spreading the musical information that they have.
*edit*
And please, don't compare file-sharing to stealing. It's far from the same thing.
Post by
109094
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Queggy
Why? Because first it's against the law.
Against the law in which country?
Because -
Should unregulated distribution of copyrighted works over Internet be allowed?
Definition of copyright
here
. By definition, anything that is copyrighted is protected by law.
Post by
MyTie
I have to lean toward Queggy here. File shareing is stealing. However, the entertainment industry is stealing our money every day and feeding us crap. That still doesn't make file shareing right, but it shows that we are the victim none the less, not them.
Post by
MyTie
The entertainment industry, or let's say, that going to the movies is like goin to a resteraunt. You trade your money for a service. One case is food, the other is entertainment.
Let's say you go out to a resteraunt and order some food, and they show the terrific looking picture on thier menu, and rave how it will be the best meal you have eaten the whole year. It has medals and critics raving about how good it is. So, you pay for your meal in advance, which is required at this resteraunt, and when you get your meal and find out it is a moldy peice of bread, you say 'HEY! Gimme my money back!'. The resteraunt promply has you removed.
That is what going to the movies is like.
Post by
Sandos
I support file sharing.
That's quite a naive point of view.
Just because you made a hit-song, doesn't mean you and your company should be paid for the next 20 years.
Let me get this straight. You think a teacher is allowed to be paid to put his expertise to use. You think that a cook is allowed to be paid for every meal he makes. You think that a car engineer is allowed to be paid for every new design he comes up with. But artists aren't allowed to be paid for what they do for a living? They should say 'hey, I worked for this, but go ahead - take it for free', right?
No, they should not.
If somebody works for 20 years straight 60 hours a week building his own little business empire, earning a small fortune, should he then give away his products because he worked for what he achieved?
No, he should not.
To put it in another angle. How much does it hurt Britney Spears' paycheck that I choose to download her album, and then delete it because it's utter crap?
Absolutely nothing.
There are plenty of ways to discover if you like an album or not. Besides, you don't tend to download CD's of which you are quite sure of beforehand that it's going to be 'utter crap', so you'd have to 'support' almost everything you download in the music genre (which is something I do not believe you actually do).
Artists makes the most money out of concerts and gigs, and t-shirts and caps and such merchandise. CD's are just a way of spreading the musical information that they have.
Is it all about the artists? How about the record companies and record stores. Take Richard Branson for example, the founder of the Virgin Group. At the age of 20 he started the Virgin Record chain, and through smart entrepreneurship he managed to attain a huge amount of money. If he would've attempted to do so in these days, with file sharing all over the world, would he have achieved the same? I doubt so. By downloading CD's and saying it doesn't hurt the artist you are neglecting a lot of other factors.
And please, don't compare file-sharing to stealing. It's far from the same thing.
I don't know what else it
should
be called. You aren't paying for copyrighted material.
"Noun
* S: (n) larceny, theft, thievery, thieving, stealing (the act of taking something from someone
unlawfully
)"
I marked unlawfully. As you're taking copyrighted material without any payment it is in conflict with the law and thus stealing.
This is of course only on CD's. If we take other types of entertainment into consideration there are *loads* more arguments to come up with why file sharing is bad.
Just my two cents.
Sandos
Post by
285472
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
I don't care if it's illegal. Why should I have to pay for music, something every human should be able to listen to for free? (last.fm lol)
You pay for water.
Post by
285472
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
I don't care if it's illegal. Why should I have to pay for music, something every human should be able to listen to for free? (last.fm lol)
You pay for water.
I drink water out of my school's water fountains etc. I don't drink water anywhere else, so no, I don't. (I liek apple juice)
Taxes, or tuition. You (or your parents) DO pay for it. You really have no idea how econmics and real life works, do you?
Post by
285472
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Slimda
That's quite a naive point of view.
Why thank you
Let me get this straight. You think a teacher is allowed to be paid to put his expertise to use.
Yes, he's working. Every day.
You think that a cook is allowed to be paid for every meal he makes.
Still, working every day.
You think that a car engineer is allowed to be paid for every new design he comes up with.
See above.
But artists aren't allowed to be paid for what they do for a living? They should say 'hey, I worked for this, but go ahead - take it for free', right?
Does he work every day? No. He cranks out one song after getting a song sent to him through his company (which somebody else wrote, lawl). He sings it in the studio for like a week or two, they fix iup and they release this brand new blockbuster of a record. Woot! millions of dollars into your bank-account!... Doesn't this strike you as totally wrong? One song can make millions, while teachers, chefs, everybody who works every day, do not? Oh well.
If somebody works for 20 years straight 60 hours a week building his own little business empire, earning a small fortune, should he then give away his products because he worked for what he achieved?
No, he should not.
Nor did I imply that he should
give
it away either.
There are plenty of ways to discover if you like an album or not.
Downloading is one of the better ones, just like listening to an album in a record-shop, without actually being in the shop in question.
Besides, you don't tend to download CD's of which you are quite sure of beforehand that it's going to be 'utter crap'
I don't download Britney Spears or other mainstream crappy music, but I like to challenge my taste of music by exploring uncharted boundaries. My playlist consists of nearly every musical genre.
so you'd have to 'support' almost everything you download in the music genre (which is something I do not believe you actually do).
I download something. I give it a few whirls, and then I delete it or archive it, depending on how I like it. And it is automatically added to my mental "to be purchased"-list. Sometimes I buy from sites like Amazon, and then I like large packages.
How about the record companies and record stores.
What is a Record company's purpose? Spreading a musical talent's talent? That might have been useful 50 years ago, but in today's age, a Record company is old, dated methods. Good artists post their songs on the net so people can download for free, and then hope they'll show up on concerts, gigs and other similar events.
Take Richard Branson for example, the founder of the Virgin Group. At the age of 20 he started the Virgin Record chain, and through smart entrepreneurship he managed to attain a huge amount of money.
And? Record Companies worked flawlessly before, since we didn't have the means of communication we have now. Artists
needed
a record company to publish their work. This isn't the case anymore.
By downloading CD's and saying it doesn't hurt the artist you are neglecting a lot of other factors.
Like what? Like the fact that I wouldn't have bought the record without listening to it first anyway? As I've said. What losses do they suffer when I download a record, and then delete it? It's
just
the same as going into a record-store, taking a CD and putting it into the CD-player at the shop, then deciding that it isn't good. You walk in, listen, and leave. No purchase made, no money lost. See my point?
I don't know what else it
should
be called.
Copying.
You aren't paying for copyrighted material.
Who said I would have paid for it anyway?
"Noun
* S: (n) larceny, theft, thievery, thieving, stealing (the act of taking something from someone
unlawfully
)"
I marked unlawfully. As you're taking copyrighted material without any payment it is in conflict with the law and thus stealing.
I can link dictionaries too! Just look!
–noun 1. an imitation, reproduction, or transcript of an original:
a copy
of a famous painting.
This is of course only on CD's. If we take other types of entertainment into consideration there are *loads* more arguments to come up with why file sharing is bad.
Software? There's always a free version on the net, which does roughly the same as it's original. Besides, what kind of regular home-user wants to pay thousands of dollars in licensing fees to a company, so you can paint a bit extra on your family photos?
Just my two cents.
Like so many other cents, either landing on one side or the other. :-)
Post by
MyTie
Yep, but I don't pay taxes, so I DON'T pay for it. Good game, sir.
Wait till your older. That water is just on loan to you, along with everything else your getting for 'free' from the government. When the 10 figure bill drops in your generation's lap, then you'll be like 'oh yeah, MyTie was right'.
Nothing is free. Nothing. Not TV, Not water, education, clothes, heathcare, NOTHING. The fact that you think you're getting it free says there is another socialist in the making. You're fooling yourself.
Post by
285472
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
I'm not fooling myself. Future =/= now.
Quiz Question 1: In what ways do the actions of humans now affect the conseqences of those same humans in the future? As of now, I, personally, do not pay for anything. My parents do. I know when I'm 16 I will start paying tax and so start paying for this stuff. I never denied this.
Quiz Question 2: In society, will you only be responsible for paying the debt occured after you turned 16, or will you also be held responsible for any governmental debt incurred before you reached that age?
Post by
331344
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Q #2... we are all screwed.
We already were, now were just doing it to our grandchildren.
Post Reply
This topic is locked. You cannot post a reply.