4 ms·

That's a dangerous line of thinking. Just because people in the US have legal access to content doesn't mean you're allowed to steal it. You make the assumptio

by afro88 12y ago

That's a dangerous line of thinking. Just because people in the US have legal access to content doesn't mean you're allowed to steal it. You make the assumption that you're entitled to something if it's commercially available to people in other parts of the world. You're not. Movies and TV Shows aren't basic necessities that you're entitled to. They are luxuries that you can have if companies decide to sell them to you.

ars 12y ago
What steal? Copyright only exists so that people have motivation to make more content. If the content is anyway not available, that argument vanishes and you are left without copyright. Copyright is not some fundamental right that always exists, it only exists in certain limited circumstances. (And seriously? Dangerous thinking?)
- afro88 12y ago
  > If the content is anyway not available, that argument vanishes and you are left without copyright. Except that if people already has a copy of your work and then you finally manage to secure a deal with a publisher in country x, you now can't sell it. Most of the interested parties already have it. > (And seriously? Dangerous thinking?) It's a slippery slope. Content creators should have full control over how their content can be consumed. This goes both ways - if they want it to be free then it should be free. Also, no other company should be able to infringe their copyright and start charging money for it, or modify it, or use it in a context that they haven't approved.
vidarh 12y ago
No matter what you think about it, copyright infringement isn't theft.
- afro88 12y ago
  Care to elaborate? As a musician I struggle to wrap my head around how people think this is the case. I record a piece of music, I own it. I say if you want to own a copy for personal consumption, it costs $5. End of the argument.
lmm 12y ago
My friend in the US has bought and paid for a show, and wants to send me a copy. Why shouldn't they be able to? The one who wants to prevent that is the one who's entitled.
- afro88 12y ago
  Because it's a copy. They should be allowed to gift you their copy of the show, sure. Just like if I bought a DVD only available in Australia and gifted it to a friend in France for example.
  - lmm 12y ago
    Well, you're already arguing for something more liberal than current law. The movie companies put a technological mechanism in place to make that not work (in violation of EU regulations, but nothing seems to have happened about that), and got laws passed to make it illegal to circumvent that mechanism. And while sending a DVD from Australia to France as a private individual is legal, doing it as a commercial operation is not. But making the real argument, if it's my DVD, I should be able to copy it.
    - afro88 12y ago
      > Well, you're already arguing for something more liberal than current law. Sure, but my point still stands :) Your friend shouldn't be allowed to copy their purchase and send it to you. They should be allowed to send you their purchase as a gift. People need to understand that just because something is digital it's not suddenly ok to endlessly copy and distribute it for free. What gives you the right? It may be unfortunate that the copyright owner of the show you like hasn't secured publishing/distribution rights in your country yet, but that doesn't give you the right to copy it for free because you really want to watch it. > The movie companies put a technological mechanism in place to make that not work (in violation of EU regulations, but nothing seems to have happened about that), and got laws passed to make it illegal to circumvent that mechanism. Yes, and I agree on this point. Region blocking sucks and it kills the gifting to an international friend scenario. > But making the real argument, if it's my DVD, I should be able to copy it. For your own personal use, yes.

by afro88 12y ago

ars 12y ago

What steal? Copyright only exists so that people have motivation to make more content. If the content is anyway not available, that argument vanishes and you are left without copyright. Copyright is not some fundamental right that always exists, it only exists in certain limited circumstances. (And seriously? Dangerous thinking?)

afro88 12y ago
> If the content is anyway not available, that argument vanishes and you are left without copyright. Except that if people already has a copy of your work and then you finally manage to secure a deal with a publisher in country x, you now can't sell it. Most of the interested parties already have it. > (And seriously? Dangerous thinking?) It's a slippery slope. Content creators should have full control over how their content can be consumed. This goes both ways - if they want it to be free then it should be free. Also, no other company should be able to infringe their copyright and start charging money for it, or modify it, or use it in a context that they haven't approved.

vidarh 12y ago

No matter what you think about it, copyright infringement isn't theft.

afro88 12y ago
Care to elaborate? As a musician I struggle to wrap my head around how people think this is the case. I record a piece of music, I own it. I say if you want to own a copy for personal consumption, it costs $5. End of the argument.

lmm 12y ago

My friend in the US has bought and paid for a show, and wants to send me a copy. Why shouldn't they be able to? The one who wants to prevent that is the one who's entitled.

afro88 12y ago
Because it's a copy. They should be allowed to gift you their copy of the show, sure. Just like if I bought a DVD only available in Australia and gifted it to a friend in France for example.
- lmm 12y ago
  Well, you're already arguing for something more liberal than current law. The movie companies put a technological mechanism in place to make that not work (in violation of EU regulations, but nothing seems to have happened about that), and got laws passed to make it illegal to circumvent that mechanism. And while sending a DVD from Australia to France as a private individual is legal, doing it as a commercial operation is not. But making the real argument, if it's my DVD, I should be able to copy it.
  - afro88 12y ago
    > Well, you're already arguing for something more liberal than current law. Sure, but my point still stands :) Your friend shouldn't be allowed to copy their purchase and send it to you. They should be allowed to send you their purchase as a gift. People need to understand that just because something is digital it's not suddenly ok to endlessly copy and distribute it for free. What gives you the right? It may be unfortunate that the copyright owner of the show you like hasn't secured publishing/distribution rights in your country yet, but that doesn't give you the right to copy it for free because you really want to watch it. > The movie companies put a technological mechanism in place to make that not work (in violation of EU regulations, but nothing seems to have happened about that), and got laws passed to make it illegal to circumvent that mechanism. Yes, and I agree on this point. Region blocking sucks and it kills the gifting to an international friend scenario. > But making the real argument, if it's my DVD, I should be able to copy it. For your own personal use, yes.