4 ms·

>It tilted people's brains into knowing that tomorrow, their favorite TV show must be downloaded somewhere else. Not sure how I feel about this. Regardless of

by giarc 12y ago

>It tilted people's brains into knowing that tomorrow, their favorite TV show must be downloaded somewhere else. Not sure how I feel about this. Regardless of how things have played out, I don't think people should expect free TV shows especially in the day and age of PVR/DVR/TIVO etc. I still think creators should be credited/paid for their work. EDIT - To expand, I think you can disagree with the cable companies and how they distribute programs (large packages of channels you want and some you don't) but I don't think you can disagree that the actors, cameramen, writers, riggers etc shouldn't be paid for their work.

humanrebar 12y ago
They should be paid for their work. They (their bosses at least) shouldn't have the power to cripple technology, limit the free flow of information, or throw people in jail to get paid. Again, we're talking about entertainment. The people working on these works are doing really cool things, but they don't have a right to get paid to do cool things. On the other hand, people should have the right to copy arbitrary bits from point A to point B. If for no other reason than freedom of speech and freedom of privacy.
- giarc 12y ago
  I agree that torrent technology should be allowed. The Pirate Bay allowed for that and likely should be able to exist, however let's call a spade a spade. Many of the material on torrent sites is copyrighted material, the founder in his piece says people can't download their TV show tomorrow, acknowledging the fact that copyrighted material drives the site.
  - humanrebar 12y ago
    Yeah, it's copyright infringement, and there's a lot of wink, wink, nudge, nudge going on that adds up to dishonesty if not outright lying. I don't claim otherwise. I just don't think copyright is an inalienable right like freedom of speech is. And being duplicitous should make you unreliable or scummy, not criminal. Barring actual fraud, of course, and I don't think all this winking adds up to fraud.
- ElComradio 12y ago
  I'm trying to figure out how you distinguish something like pirating a movie versus if I were to torrent your diary (assuming it did not involve breaking and entering your home, or whatever. Let's say you left it on a table and I copied it when you were in the bathroom). I'm assuming you would assert some control over those words. But when you object, I can say, "Well, look, you aren't losing anything, so nothing wrong really occurred here. You aren't deprived of your data." So ok, instead of a diary, now let's say you work with a couple guys on a piece of fiction and someone 'releases' it before it's done. Why is that different? So ok, now I get together with 1,000 people and make a $180M movie. How is that different? At what point of these examples does a piece of information go from being OK to secure (diary) to not? (a movie)
newaccountfool 12y ago
I think your implying that every download is a lost sale, it doesn't work like that.
- giarc 12y ago
  I agree that some people wouldn't watch the show if they couldn't download it, but why do they have that right to get it for free? I understand that torrent technology is great, but TPB founder is using downloading TV shows as an example of how things will change.
  - scrollaway 12y ago
    As I said in a comment below, you too have it backwards. It's not about the "right of the people to download shit for free". It's about the right of the corporations to go to hell and beyond to justify a few bucks; putting people in jail and corrupting the judicial and political system in the process... for what is essentially a harmless offence.
    - giarc 12y ago
      I think the level of penalty related to torrents and downloading copyrighter material is a matter of opinion. I don't know enough to say jail time is too harsh/not enough. "Harmless offence"? Really? Maybe harmless in the fact that no one died, but it's not harmless that people's work is being stolen. What if people stole your work? I don't think you can point to the rich people in Hollywood and say "They have enough money already, they can afford to lose some people to torrents" because for every rich actor/screenwriter/producer, there are 100 other entertainment workers that don't make $100,000 per episode.
      - pbhjpbhj 12y ago
        So, when a movie has made $100 million and I buy a download for $5, how much of that goes to the ordinary workers (not rights holders, not first rank actors)? I'm going with none. Once the show breaks even the people who worked on it have been paid their wages. There's no argument of loss of income to make. Sure you can argue the rights holders deserve their extra millions (or cents) but your argument on loss of wages is void then. So I torrent a movie, Avatar say, and now I should go to jail for several years and pay a fine that bankrupts me? Whilst if I take a packet of cigarettes from a shop - about the same sales value - I get a fine of $20 and maybe if I'm really unlucky a night in a cell. This is a complete disparity of punishment. The only reason for it to be like this is media interests owning the political process to such an extent that they can buy preferential treatment before the law. And what's worse, is that the shop owner will get nothing, no police will help with their loss despite it being a physical good. Whilst for the movie rights holder, despite the actual loss being virtually zero (if not actually negative as sales can follow directly from the action) they get massive aid from the legal system and incomprehensibly large punishments on their behalf. Copyright infringement should by rights be a tort too.
zanny 12y ago
> I still think creators should be credited/paid for their work. This has nothing to do with: > I don't think people should expect free TV shows The information was created. The actual creators in most cases were paid, on a salary, by a company. They did get their money. The company funding them just expects perpetual returns using the copyright framework of the host countries legal system. It is an artificial investment industry, but that is how it works for probably 99% of sold copyright works by volume. Just remember, while copyright imparts a false scarcity upon (through modern technology) non-scarce information, there is a scarce good involved, the time and effort of skilled creators, and that like in every other industry ever you can bill for that as much as any other skill, regardless of who is paying you to do it.

by giarc 12y ago

humanrebar 12y ago

They should be paid for their work. They (their bosses at least) shouldn't have the power to cripple technology, limit the free flow of information, or throw people in jail to get paid. Again, we're talking about entertainment. The people working on these works are doing really cool things, but they don't have a right to get paid to do cool things. On the other hand, people should have the right to copy arbitrary bits from point A to point B. If for no other reason than freedom of speech and freedom of privacy.

giarc 12y ago
I agree that torrent technology should be allowed. The Pirate Bay allowed for that and likely should be able to exist, however let's call a spade a spade. Many of the material on torrent sites is copyrighted material, the founder in his piece says people can't download their TV show tomorrow, acknowledging the fact that copyrighted material drives the site.
- humanrebar 12y ago
  Yeah, it's copyright infringement, and there's a lot of wink, wink, nudge, nudge going on that adds up to dishonesty if not outright lying. I don't claim otherwise. I just don't think copyright is an inalienable right like freedom of speech is. And being duplicitous should make you unreliable or scummy, not criminal. Barring actual fraud, of course, and I don't think all this winking adds up to fraud.
ElComradio 12y ago
I'm trying to figure out how you distinguish something like pirating a movie versus if I were to torrent your diary (assuming it did not involve breaking and entering your home, or whatever. Let's say you left it on a table and I copied it when you were in the bathroom). I'm assuming you would assert some control over those words. But when you object, I can say, "Well, look, you aren't losing anything, so nothing wrong really occurred here. You aren't deprived of your data." So ok, instead of a diary, now let's say you work with a couple guys on a piece of fiction and someone 'releases' it before it's done. Why is that different? So ok, now I get together with 1,000 people and make a $180M movie. How is that different? At what point of these examples does a piece of information go from being OK to secure (diary) to not? (a movie)

newaccountfool 12y ago

I think your implying that every download is a lost sale, it doesn't work like that.

giarc 12y ago
I agree that some people wouldn't watch the show if they couldn't download it, but why do they have that right to get it for free? I understand that torrent technology is great, but TPB founder is using downloading TV shows as an example of how things will change.
- scrollaway 12y ago
  As I said in a comment below, you too have it backwards. It's not about the "right of the people to download shit for free". It's about the right of the corporations to go to hell and beyond to justify a few bucks; putting people in jail and corrupting the judicial and political system in the process... for what is essentially a harmless offence.
  - giarc 12y ago
    I think the level of penalty related to torrents and downloading copyrighter material is a matter of opinion. I don't know enough to say jail time is too harsh/not enough. "Harmless offence"? Really? Maybe harmless in the fact that no one died, but it's not harmless that people's work is being stolen. What if people stole your work? I don't think you can point to the rich people in Hollywood and say "They have enough money already, they can afford to lose some people to torrents" because for every rich actor/screenwriter/producer, there are 100 other entertainment workers that don't make $100,000 per episode.
    - pbhjpbhj 12y ago
      So, when a movie has made $100 million and I buy a download for $5, how much of that goes to the ordinary workers (not rights holders, not first rank actors)? I'm going with none. Once the show breaks even the people who worked on it have been paid their wages. There's no argument of loss of income to make. Sure you can argue the rights holders deserve their extra millions (or cents) but your argument on loss of wages is void then. So I torrent a movie, Avatar say, and now I should go to jail for several years and pay a fine that bankrupts me? Whilst if I take a packet of cigarettes from a shop - about the same sales value - I get a fine of $20 and maybe if I'm really unlucky a night in a cell. This is a complete disparity of punishment. The only reason for it to be like this is media interests owning the political process to such an extent that they can buy preferential treatment before the law. And what's worse, is that the shop owner will get nothing, no police will help with their loss despite it being a physical good. Whilst for the movie rights holder, despite the actual loss being virtually zero (if not actually negative as sales can follow directly from the action) they get massive aid from the legal system and incomprehensibly large punishments on their behalf. Copyright infringement should by rights be a tort too.

zanny 12y ago

> I still think creators should be credited/paid for their work. This has nothing to do with: > I don't think people should expect free TV shows The information was created. The actual creators in most cases were paid, on a salary, by a company. They did get their money. The company funding them just expects perpetual returns using the copyright framework of the host countries legal system. It is an artificial investment industry, but that is how it works for probably 99% of sold copyright works by volume. Just remember, while copyright imparts a false scarcity upon (through modern technology) non-scarce information, there is a scarce good involved, the time and effort of skilled creators, and that like in every other industry ever you can bill for that as much as any other skill, regardless of who is paying you to do it.