6 ms·

So, the distinction is self-serving and intellectually dishonest rationalization? Not exactly surprising.

fleitz 14y ago
I believe this is the same distinction the movie/music industry uses between what they rip off and what their potential customers use. I mean I'm sure right now the RIAA is taking down most of their electronic back catalog until they figure out how to compensate the original artists behind the Amen Break sample.
- MiguelHudnandez 14y ago
  For anyone with 20 minutes to spare, here is a great video explaining the prevalence of the "Amen Break" sample. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SaFTm2bcac http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SaFTm2bcac
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
Goladus 14y ago
It's a rebuttal to an argument with flawed assumptions anyway. "Internet vigilante" is a stereotype and we have no way of knowing that the people supporting Inman are the same people who complain about unspecified copyright holders taking down unspecified content from unspecified sites under unspecified conditions.
derleth 14y ago
I notice you're ignoring most of the other explanations of this behavior, and instead picking on this one. Why?
- MartinCron 14y ago
  If there's one thing that the study of ethics has consistently proven is that people will rationalize and bend their ethical code to fit their behavior and not change their behavior to live up to their ethical code. There are notable exceptions, but I'm generalizing on purpose. So, when the same people get upset about FunnyJunk "stealing" content from TheOatmeal and then torrent Game of Thrones, they have to adapt their ethical code from "copyright infringement is bad" to "infringing upon an individual's copyright is different from infringing upon a corporation's copyright" or "HBO won't let me consume their media in the way that I want when I want it, so I'm just going to torrent it"
  - derleth 14y ago
    > they have to adapt their ethical code from "copyright infringement is bad" How about "plagiarism is bad" and/or "monetarily profiting off the work of others is bad"? Both of those are self-consistent in this context.

I believe this is the same distinction the movie/music industry uses between what they rip off and what their potential customers use. I mean I'm sure right now the RIAA is taking down most of their electronic back catalog until they figure out how to compensate the original artists behind the Amen Break sample.

MiguelHudnandez 14y ago
For anyone with 20 minutes to spare, here is a great video explaining the prevalence of the "Amen Break" sample. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SaFTm2bcac http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SaFTm2bcac

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

Goladus 14y ago

It's a rebuttal to an argument with flawed assumptions anyway. "Internet vigilante" is a stereotype and we have no way of knowing that the people supporting Inman are the same people who complain about unspecified copyright holders taking down unspecified content from unspecified sites under unspecified conditions.

derleth 14y ago

I notice you're ignoring most of the other explanations of this behavior, and instead picking on this one. Why?

MartinCron 14y ago
If there's one thing that the study of ethics has consistently proven is that people will rationalize and bend their ethical code to fit their behavior and not change their behavior to live up to their ethical code. There are notable exceptions, but I'm generalizing on purpose. So, when the same people get upset about FunnyJunk "stealing" content from TheOatmeal and then torrent Game of Thrones, they have to adapt their ethical code from "copyright infringement is bad" to "infringing upon an individual's copyright is different from infringing upon a corporation's copyright" or "HBO won't let me consume their media in the way that I want when I want it, so I'm just going to torrent it"
- derleth 14y ago
  > they have to adapt their ethical code from "copyright infringement is bad" How about "plagiarism is bad" and/or "monetarily profiting off the work of others is bad"? Both of those are self-consistent in this context.