re: Why is it ok to steal media?

quote:

---

OK, so I may get a bit long winded and/or philosophical here, so bear with me.

1*) I disagree with your use of the term "steal."

2) There is a wealth of political philosophy that disagrees with the concept of intellectual property, and considers it simple economic protectionism.

3) Even if you do think that some IP protections are necessary, I would bet that you wouldn't agree with what is currently on the books (nor would most reasonable people). Nor would you like what you learn when you delve into the extreme corporate lobbying done by the entertainment industry in order to make IP protections more beneficial for themselves.

4) Markets operate irrespective of law and morality. It is up to the industry to adjust its business practice to current market trends. If an industry doesn't do that, then they will suffer the consequences of that choice.





*As to #1: Please stop using the term "steal." People are not stealing anything. They are copying. Yes, there is a significant difference, despite what the industry propagandists tell you.

---

quote:

---

Why is it ok to steal media?

---

Most people think they do the right thing all the time, or at the very least they think they made the right choice of the options available to them. For the most part humans rationalize the bad choices they make.

On the flip side, why is it ok for media companies to gouge their customers and not reduce the pricing and increase availability options that come with technology advances? What gives them the right to not adapt to a changing market place? They aren't doing the "right thing" either, they are doing what's in their best interest, because they can. When companies can get away with taking extra money from customers they usually do, they just tend to call it a fee rather than stealing.

Art (be it Television, music, books, traditional art) is meant to be seen by as many people as possible. The purpose of Art is to create something you truly are proud of and spread it to the rest of human consciousness.

The $ part of it is the business side, and true artists who aren't greedy promote filesharing (see: trent reznor and NIN relasing a full length album for free, radiohead, etc) Musicians these days (the broadband age) make their money touring from merchandise rather than record sales. Hell, even in the golden age (vinyl, cassettes, CDs) the artist only got like $1-2 per $20 album. I know it doesn't make it right but it comes down to greed.

If I download a great album, I will go and purchase it from FYE or amazon online. I pay for neflix and hulu plus, so what's wrong with me downloading a show to watch at a different time (timeshifting) is it "stealing" a TV show if I pay for cable (how is that any different from DVR'ing it?)

I was at the LSU/Ole Miss game and forgot to set my DVR, so I downloaded an HD copy of it to see the broadcast of it. Is this stealing?

Movies are a bit different and more of a gray area. Movies are meant to be seen on the Big Screen so downloading a shitty cam rip or w/e when it's still in theatres is a bit more damaging IMO, because that person won't go pay for the ticket to see it most likely.

In general, media is just under a very bad set of circumstances. People will only buy what they believe the exchange of value is fair and even, so when you have:

1. Media as only an experience a user is trading for (even legally)
2. The limitation (and stigma) of physical property gone
3. The ease of transfer over the internet.
4. The arbitrary limitations of access that companies put media under.

Honestly, I see where the comment above is coming from, it's only a problem if you turn around and try to make money from it.

For me, the morality on the issue is becoming less and less of a factor. If companies don't embrace ways to package their technology, they'll just get lost in the fold. nI admit, I download/steal some...Experiences.

Look, I think access is the big issue in all of this at the end of it. As long as companies singularly package their products (movie tickets, DVDs, multiple rents, etc.) people will have a moral out. Even when BUYING a product and paying attention to all of their laws, you only have like 6-8 months after purchasing a DVD to download a digital copy.

Why not make accounts with each movie studio (or a major central place) that stores all of your DVD/digital purchases and give you the ability to download movies to what you want, when you want. Same with TV. The infrastructure is there and easy.

I'd easily buy more movies, tickets, etc., if they packaged them with more permanence.

Why do I watch movies again? Because I want the same experience I got before. Just because the product is an "experience" and not a physical product, doesn't mean you can charge for each time I use it.

I buy a soccer ball, I get that experience any time I want. It should be the same for all media.

quote:

---

if a movie costs $100 million to produce and the studios expect to make $50 million in profit on it

---

Don't buy into their bullshite numbers.

Hollywood Accounting: How A $19 Million Movie Makes $150 Million... And Still Isn't Profitable


another article from a more reliable source:

How Hollywood Accounting Can Make a $450 Million Movie 'Unprofitable'



frick those assholes

I've read those before. I can't believe that crap is even legal. Don't CEOs go to jail for similar stuff?

I used to be in a band and I was a hell of a lot more concerned with people just listening to it than buying it. Then again that wasn't my career.

But I raise the question, what's the difference from someone buying a CD and letting 6 of their friends rip it into their computer? Why is it so wrong to upload it and then let others have it as well?

quote:

---

what's the difference from someone buying a CD and letting 6 of their friends rip it into their computer? Why is it so wrong to upload it and then let others have it as well?

---

Well in that situation, there is no difference. The problem is money. Using Freaux's example, no one would have a problem with you sharing a soccer ball with your 6 friends. But the difference is, you can't clone a soccer ball and give it away to your 6 friends.

I'm thinking if there were an NFL jersey cloning machine and I decided to pay 100 bucks for a jersey, clone it 100 times and sell each of them for less or just give them away, the NFL would have a problem with that and so would the player.

The argument of course is that the most people wouldn't have otherwise bought the jersey and the NFL and the player really isn't losing any money. But some people may have bought the jersey at full price and now they don't need to.

It really is a sticky situation.

This has been going on since recordable reel to reel audio tape first became available to the public. We've all been brought up in a world where media (for the most part) is free. Radio and TV have fed into our homes at no charge, and now that we have an opportunity to get additional music and video for free, it's easy to see no fault in it.

I didn't grow up with folks giving my family free food and clothing. So those items have a different value to me than non physical items like music and video that have always been available free of charge.

My take anyway. I may think differently when those 3D Scanner/Duplicators become available and allow us to produce copies of solid objects in our homes.