There are two ways of looking at this issue thought the use of analogies, first is the copy analogy and then the open house analogy. The copy analogy works like this, say you go to a Barns&Noble or a Boarders book store and take with you a note pad and a pen, If you go in there and copy quotes and pages is that stealing? Boarders and Barns&Noble have never sued any one over this one that I know of because even if you could make exact copies with a small page scanner the truth is that all you have are just copies, same applies with music, you don’t have the original album and that therefore means that in truth you don’t have the actual product. Artist still make money off of CD sales because fans will still buy them cuz they like the music. Now onto the open house analogy, If I had an Open House and anyone could came in and play video games, listen to music or use my Internet connection to make e-mails then is that stealing? I still paid for the products being used but the people coming into my house never paid for them, is that stealing? Ultimately I agree it is an issue of semantics but the actual concept of it is in no way an infringement. Its not artists who are hurt by this, it is record companies because like all things they are starting to become obsolete. They are forgetting that one of their primary reasons to existence is to help spread an artists work so that way they can develop a fan base and ultimately share the artists music with the world. I ask how can this be done if the only way of doing so is providing it just to people who can afford it?

Lack of Understanding
 

My comments are directed at Barwire ---

If really understood how this whole process worked you would know that the government has to prove no such thing.
Most of what you said is irrelevant.


Here are the facts:

1. You agree not to use your Internet connection for illegal activity including but not limited to acts of copyright infringment i.e. unauthorized distribution / reproduction of copyrighted materials. (Check the TOS and AUP for your ISP.)

2. When it is found that you are doing this, you are notified i.e given an opportunity to make corrections. Perhaps you are sharing stuff by (insert your favorite excuse, rationalization here). The point is after you been notified you must take some action to correct it.

3. If you are found to have continuted your actions and have ignore the warnings for whatever reasons. Further action may be taken against you.



The point is -- there's a chain of events that causes a person to end up in the situation you outlined.

Copyright Infringment Primer
 

These comments are directed to Red_starr

Although well intended, your comments are just another example of a gross rationalization. Here's why the ways you and others

choose to look at the issue are based on your interests in the matter that is, getting stuff for free.

Here's what people who make such argument ignore.

1. There's a difference between rights and privileges. - Rights are derived from ownership. Therefore, if I CREATE

something I own it. Because I OWN it then I have the RIGHT TO DICTATE its use.


2. As a consumer (the person who DID NOT create the said content but is interested in it.) I have to adhere to the

provisions dictated by the content owner, creator or other representative. If I don't like the terms I can choose not to
acquire the content.

3. If I choose to acquire the content I am offered several privileges (notice not rights). Those privileges usually include

personal consumption of the materials at will. These privileges usually exclude reproduction and distribution without FIRST

obtaining permission from the OWNER, CREATOR, REPRESENTATIVE.

It is around this issue that this whole drama is born.

It appears that a segment of the population has a problem separating the fact that when they buy media i.e. CDs DVD or

subscription services. What they are paying for is a) The physical or digital distribution mechanism used to deliver the content and b) the privilege to consume its contents in ways specified by the creator.

If you don't like it you don't have to buy the content. This is your only viable solution. Doing anything else (downloading it, reproducing it etc.) Is a violation of the creators rights and will only lead to you suffering the conseqences of your actions.

Now obviously, if you do these things in the confines of your own home then are they a violation of the creators RIGHTS? Of
course it is. I want to be clear about this.

Here's where all of the confusion comes in.

a) Unuathorized Reproduction and Distribution is prohibited. (means: if you didn't get permission from us to do this then
you don't have it period. -- and you will be subject to prosecution if you do any of the above.)


--- What if I wanted to make a backup of my media? (see a)
--- What if I wanted to convert my DVD / Music collection to AVI's and MP3's? So that I can watch on my computer etc (see a)
--- What if I wanted to give copies of my DVD / Music collection to my grandmother? (see a)

You can pretty much get away with doing any of the above things with little or no threat of persecution. Why?
because any of the above actions constitute a level of piracy that is tolerable. Why? because under two points the

consumption of the content is limited to the person who has the privilege to consume it. The third point is a level of

piracy most content creators expect that is, a limited amount of piracy.

b) Peer-to-peer technology, increased access to broadband and a lot of generation Y-ers have turn this who situation into a

real problem.

-- Peer-to-peer technology is a super-distribution technology. It turns the whole distribution model on its head. You can

take one set of content and immediately make it available to literally millions of people. The spread of the content

increases exponentially. Can you see why this might be a problem to the content owners if people take their content and make

it available via such a system? (This is why they are trying to kill the technology --which I think is a bad idea.)

-- Increased access to broadband -- The higher the speeds, the greater the penetration makes the impact unauthorized

distribution a serious threat worthy of the current actions to try to control it.


-- A new generation -- I'm a generation X'er a working professional. I pay more in taxes a year than most of the people in

the peer-to-peer community make in a year. I limit my spending to things that I need and I can afford to buy the things that

I want and before I would afford to buy the things that I wanted I simply did without and if I feel that I don't like the

terms or that something cost to much I simply keep my money. The point of all of this, is that this is how our economic

systems works and this is how the vast majority of people behave in that system.

Now, if you are a person of little means and little responsibility you will have an entirely different view of the situation.

But understand that your view is influenced by your situation. People who sign the back of checks have a completely

different view from the people who sign the front of them.

In other words, no industry can compete with free but pirates can't win without losing. The entire system is against you.
So people can talk all they want in forums about how someone should stand up an fight the good fight. However, I an assure

you that if you don't understand how this all works and furthermore don't accept what I've had to say about this. You will

learn what those who have settled have learned and that is, it's simply not worth it.


--Nothing I've stated here should be considered an endorsement of copyright infringment. I respect the rights of creators.
This information is intended to educate the P2P community about the risks of piracy and copyright infringment.

oy fatty

i thought about that.. is limewire legal but if you think

X---->y y------->z

when Y purchases a product off of X it isnt really thiers anymore.

Its like saying

I brought a 2 lollys from asda and gave 1 to my friend
Asda couldnt take my friend to court for theft.

So if you just download music and just listen to it on your pc and thats all is that illegal like can you get in trouble for that?


Ty rogue

Oh lol thanks.But how would you get cought?

Rogue :cool:

Copying Stealing and all this foolishness.
 

Alright. Let me put in my little two bit too.

Let's say that a record company just releases a new album for this artist (X). I go to the store and buy this album from X. Isn't this X's album for me to do whatever I want to do with it. Isn't the CD mine. They can't take it back from me, if I paid for it.

Now if I decided to share my paid-for CD (X's Album) with people, and people took it from me, then whoever took it from me is not doing anyting illegal. Right? Because it was my CD which I bought.
If I bought it, then I have the right to do whatever I want with it. Share it and copy it.

Now if I copied it and started to sell it that is illegal. This is one of the reasons, why (these people) do not want us to Reproduce it. Because if I reproduced it Z times and sold it, then it would not be the music company making the profit. It would be me. Now this is illegal.

But to buy it then to share it for free is not illegal. Right?

Somebody want to tell me their thoughts now?

KOOL, Mr. Anonymous:cool:

Ignore the username
 

What about the "FBI Warning" they show on movie DVDs and videos? I remeber the gist of it was that you could copy it and play it as much as you wanted for private use.

Do I have this right?

Does it allow p2p filesharing of movies ripped from DVDs/videocasettes?

Still Infringment
 

Dear Tha Anonymous 1,

The whole problem with your argument has been covered before but let me recap. When you buy a CD it is true that you physically own the CD. However, the contents of that CD are protected by copyright. Just about all music and movies place restrictions on redistribution -- that is, your ability to give away or to sell unauthorized copies. There is no distinction as to whether you do it for fun or for profit.

Typically it says "Unauthorized reproduction or distribution is strictly prohibited" and NOT "Unauthorized reproduction or distribution is strictly prohibited unless you are giving it away for free then it's okay."