Downloading music from the internet...

[.Ant]

Re: greed .

Re: greed .

Originally posted by Rav_Yeshai
Thought! ---> Did you know it would not be a sin to

1. be the head of your own country
and
2. make millions of copies of products ; microsoft, playststion.

hmmmm, I wonder what the ole U.S. would do If i owned an illand and copied millions of copies of software, dvds, videos, books, etc, then when I hear word from the justice dept and foriegn affairs of how my country is "hurting " the greedy republic, THEN I tell the U.S. to mind their own business "Cuz I have nukes pointed at ya!"

LOLOLOLOL!!!!!

now that would be funny!

If i were that rich! I would do that and give all the copies away. tell the U.S. I do not honor their ridiculuous "It's my idea first!" laws.

Not really funny - the US would just invade your country and force you to stop... or implement sanctions etc...

 

[Rav_Yeshai]

but look how much fun i could have in the mean time ,

 

[.Ant]

Originally posted by Rav_Yeshai
I'm pro theocrocy. I am not a proponent of democrocy. (this issue is one reason why)

Democrocy is like being in a cage with nine canniabals and then voting on whether eating human should be allowed.

Thats sad.

The culture or social construct that rewards ignorance or injustice will deconstruct itself.

In this country at anytime, the inmates can take over the assylum. And that in itself is frieghtning. (acctually, it's already happened, ask any WW2 vet. they didnt fight for this!)

Democracy is certainly not ideal. But is theocracy better? What of the risks of unjust rulers?

 

[Rav_Yeshai]

this is why the Mouth of Yahweh Elohiym will rule all nations (before their destruction) himself one day. (I cannot wait) Come soon Yashua please!

 

[.Ant]

Oops, I was thinking you said monarchy. Who can have a problem with theocracy? Dissenters go to hell!

 

[Eli_Cash]

Copying music or other files is not stealing. It is against the law however. The use of the term piracy is a propaganda term to support an unjust law.

 

[.Ant]

Piracy is not a term of propaganda, but of truth. Too bad if you don't like the law.

Piracy is not a term of propaganda, but of truth. Too bad if you don't like the law.

Due to copyright law, it is in fact stealing. You are stealing someone else's proprietary material, which only they have the right to distribute.

Copying software is also lying, due to the license agreement you clicked "yes" to.

 

[Eli_Cash]

"OK, october, quit your job or whatever it is you do for a living and decide to make your living as a musician. Write a song and put it in your Kazaa folder and put it out there for everyone to share. When's your first dollar from your musician profession going to come in?"

This is a greatly misinformed position. Musicians don't make money from CD's, that all goes to the record label. In order to get any money from the record label, the musician has to be rich enough to hire lawyers to audit the label. Most musicians make their money from touring. The get popular from the mass distribution which the record company provides. With PC's this is no longer an issue. The record company has become obsolete, and propaganda like this statement is only slowing its demise, and is making it harder for artist to truly be in control of their ideas. Did you know that when a musician makes a record for a major label, the songs he records become the property of that label? In book deals, the author retains the rights, but licenses a company to publish the work. Record companies are not only obsolete, but they are also immoral.

 

[Eli_Cash]

"Due to copyright law, it is in fact stealing. You are stealing someone else's proprietary material, which only they have the right to distribute."

Sorry pal, but stealing is not defined by any particular law. When a song is copied no one is deprived of any particular product. What they are deprived of is a monopoly.

 

[.Ant]

Aye?

Aye?

When a song is copied, the artist is deprived of some of their rightful earnings. If you were allowed to copy books, for instance, how would anyone make a living as a writer? Publishers would just publish everything that sold well, and almost no profit would go to the writer...

I don't know about you, but depriving someone of rightfully earned money sounds like stealing to me.

 

[Eli_Cash]

"When a song is copied, the artist is deprived of some of their rightful earnings. If you were allowed to copy books, for instance, how would anyone make a living as a writer? Publishers would just publish everything that sold well, and almost no profit would go to the writer...

I don't know about you, but depriving someone of rightfully earned money sounds like stealing to me."

Rightful earnings consist of what a person can earn in a free market. A market regulated by copyright laws is not a free market. Consider this. A certain man makes widgets and sells them for two dollars each. Another man makes them, but gives them away for free. If I go to the guy who is giving them away, am I stealing from the man who is selling them?

 

[wholearmor]

Originally posted by Goose
The same reason that people like to work on their homes and cars. To make better DVD or Playstation technology. To make them better in some way. Your question sounds like it comes from someone who likes to prevent progress in the hands of commoners, rather then big business.

As far as I can tell, Goose, you are the king of reading something into someone's message that isn't there. You speculate alot and you are wrong alot.

So you believe you should be able to take a Playstation, do a simple, minor modification, and sell the modified Playstation as your own invention or would your modification be to simply benefit you personally?

 

[.Ant]

Originally posted by Eli_Cash
Rightful earnings consist of what a person can earn in a free market. A market regulated by copyright laws is not a free market. Consider this. A certain man makes widgets and sells them for two dollars each. Another man makes them, but gives them away for free. If I go to the guy who is giving them away, am I stealing from the man who is selling them?

Erm... copyright laws are as necessary as laws against theivery in today's world. Much of what is produced does not have immediate material value, so it doesn't fall under property law, however isn't it fair to say that a book written by me belongs to me, and that everyone shouldn't be allowed to copy it, adjust it, and sell it as they wish? Again, how can any producer of information make any money otherwise?

 

[Goose]

Originally posted by wholearmor
As far as I can tell, Goose, you are the king of reading something into someone's message that isn't there. You speculate alot and you are wrong alot.

So you believe you should be able to take a Playstation, do a simple, minor modification, and sell the modified Playstation as your own invention or would your modification be to simply benefit you personally?

You can make modification chips and plug them into your playstations. It is illegal to make modification chips under the DMCA. If the DMCA was applied to cars, you wouldn't be able to install the high performance air filter you been working on, because of intellectual property.

THe mod chips don't come with a playstation. You just plug them into an existing playstation.

 

[wholearmor]

Originally posted by Goose
You can make modification chips and plug them into your playstations. It is illegal to make modification chips under the DMCA. If the DMCA was applied to cars, you wouldn't be able to install the high performance air filter you been working on, because of intellectual property.

THe mod chips don't come with a playstation. You just plug them into an existing playstation.

So if I'm caught making mod chips, I could be arrested along with my neighbor with the meth lab?

Why doesn't the DMCA want people making mod chips and installing them into Playstations?

 

[Goose]

Originally posted by wholearmor
So if I'm caught making mod chips, I could be arrested along with my neighbor with the meth lab?

yes

Why doesn't the DMCA want people making mod chips and installing them into Playstations?

Because they want to create an abstract medium/protocol for which only their media can be played and no one elses. It effectively controls the transfer of "unauthorized" data by making the Corporations the authority, not the end consumer.

 

[Rav_Yeshai]

Due to copyright law, it is in fact stealing. You are stealing someone else's proprietary material, which only they have the right to distribute.

Actually this law does not fit the Torah's definition of theft. The law can call it what ever they please. But it is not stealing.

It would be like this:
A neighbor is getting "Illegal cable" and everyday you come over to watch it, not knowing it he was recieving itand breaking the law.
Now, were you sinning when you watched?

Not at all.

yet. this is breaking the law to "watch" cable they have not charged you for.

You can't put the theft label on just any violation and think it will fly. This is silly.

"You saw my tv show at your neighbor's so your under arrest!" LOL

or how about this, 37 years from now your walking through a busy part of a city and hear music. suddenly 2 cops appear and detain you for "stealing" CFM signals and listening to them.

This is a joke. Much like the satelite argument. Under fed. law you cannot posess a device to tune in the waves that are all around us.

Think about it. the waves are all around. you cannot even make a device to receive them or you will be "stealing".

I place these "laws" into the "Corp America needs to get richer, so they streach the meaning of stealing" laws bag.

Rule no 1 of business, If you have to rewrite the Word of Yahweh Elohi in order to make a profit. Dont go into that business.

Erm... copyright laws are as necessary as laws against theivery in today's world. Much of what is produced does not have immediate material value, so it doesn't fall under property law, however isn't it fair to say that a book written by me belongs to me, and that everyone shouldn't be allowed to copy it, adjust it, and sell it as they wish? Again, how can any producer of information make any money otherwise?

Can you say that in your own words? Or have you been using the same words everyone else has been using?
Copyright laws are as necessary as laws against ... oops I'd better stop or I could be arrested!

copyright laws are:

uneeded, against Yahweh Eloah, for the greedy, selfish, fearful

To bad the Jews didnt copyright the Torah. LOL

If the words Yashua spoke were truth then they would be consistent.

IF copyright law is just, it will be consistent. lets put them to the test shall we?

I once had an article posted to my website by a friend in which it was taken from another website. The person who wrote it contacted me and told me o how it was her article. I told her I would take it down, but asked her (to make a point) If i could use the: "and if" and "There was a" out of it. LOL

I asked how much of the work I could use before I was stealing. (This idea in itself which is man made, is rediculous)30%? 20%? 5%? LOL

I asked her if any of the words used were copywritten by her, because I had other articles that had simular words or the same words and didnt want to be sued or arrested.

Was downloading mp3's stealing before the law "the digital millenial copyright act" was in effect?

Appearently not, as napster was up and no one was arrested.

however, whether stealing a car is against the law or not, it will always be stealing.


Do you see how stupid and childish these "laws" are.

Again, owning an idea is a new concept to the Jewish mind.(not saying noone shouldnt be protected against someone else selling their authorship)
but like all garbage, when Yashua returns ,it will find itself in the pit.
Oymein!

 

[Eli_Cash]

"Erm... copyright laws are as necessary as laws against theivery in today's world."

No they aren't, because copying a work does not deprive anyone of anything. Thievery does.

"Much of what is produced does not have immediate material value, so it doesn't fall under property law, however isn't it fair to say that a book written by me belongs to me, and that everyone shouldn't be allowed to copy it, adjust it, and sell it as they wish?"

But how can one sell anything if copyright is what gives it a value? It is fair to abolish laws that artificially constrain a market. These laws are communist. They run contrary to the proper functioning of a free market.

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/1/29/12540/2722

"Again, how can any producer of information make any money otherwise?"

Who says they should? But it is possible nevertheless. As I have pointed out before, very few musicians with record deals actually make money from record sales. They earn money from performances. And software companies can and do make money from actively supporting free software.

A good question for you is, is it fair to have a law that lets you work once, and make money from that work for the rest of your life?

And also my original question, is it stealing for me to get my widgets for free when someone else is selling them?

 

[.Ant]

Originally posted by Rav_Yeshai
A neighbor is getting "Illegal cable" and everyday you come over to watch it, not knowing it he was recieving itand breaking the law.
Now, were you sinning when you watched?

No. However it would be a sin if you did know.

When it comes to music piracy, you know that it's a sin. You know that it's illegal.

Originally posted by Rav_Yeshai
or how about this, 37 years from now your walking through a busy part of a city and hear music. suddenly 2 cops appear and detain you for "stealing" CFM signals and listening to them.

This is a joke. Much like the satelite argument. Under fed. law you cannot posess a device to tune in the waves that are all around us.

Think about it. the waves are all around. you cannot even make a device to receive them or you will be "stealing".

I place these "laws" into the "Corp America needs to get richer, so they streach the meaning of stealing" laws bag.

Rule no 1 of business, If you have to rewrite the Word of Yahweh Elohi in order to make a profit. Dont go into that business.

I agree. There are lots of silly laws, some of which are impossible to obey. However others, like copyrights, *usually* make good sense.

Originally posted by Rav_Yeshai

Originally posted by .Ant
Erm... copyright laws are as necessary as laws against theivery in today's world. Much of what is produced does not have immediate material value, so it doesn't fall under property law, however isn't it fair to say that a book written by me belongs to me, and that everyone shouldn't be allowed to copy it, adjust it, and sell it as they wish? Again, how can any producer of information make any money otherwise?

Can you say that in your own words? Or have you been using the same words everyone else has been using?

??? Those are my own words...

Originally posted by Rav_Yeshai
IF copyright law is just, it will be consistent. lets put them to the test shall we?

Yes, but that doesn't mean all copyright law is unjust. Just like some property law may be unjust, but that doesn't justify stealing.

Originally posted by Rav_Yeshai
I once had an article posted to my website by a friend in which it was taken from another website. The person who wrote it contacted me and told me o how it was her article. I told her I would take it down, but asked her (to make a point) If i could use the: "and if" and "There was a" out of it. LOL

I asked how much of the work I could use before I was stealing. (This idea in itself which is man made, is rediculous)30%? 20%? 5%? LOL

I asked her if any of the words used were copywritten by her, because I had other articles that had simular words or the same words and didnt want to be sued or arrested.

Was downloading mp3's stealing before the law "the digital millenial copyright act" was in effect?

Appearently not, as napster was up and no one was arrested.

however, whether stealing a car is against the law or not, it will always be stealing.

I can say the same about reasonable defined copyrights... like x number of words or something, I'm no expert, but I do think breaking copyrights can be stealing.

Originally posted by Rav_Yeshai
(not saying noone shouldnt be protected against someone else selling their authorship)

That's the kind of copyright law I'm talking about. Music, books, art...

 

[.Ant]

Originally posted by Eli_Cash
"Erm... copyright laws are as necessary as laws against theivery in today's world."

No they aren't, because copying a work does not deprive anyone of anything. Thievery does.

It deprives people of profits and/or potential profits.

From http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/1/29/12540/2722
So what about people who download and listen to unpaid-for music? These people are certainly breaking the law and must accept the associated risks, but they are not morally in the wrong. They simply represent points on the demand curve that the RIAA member companies have chosen not to sell to because they are not "sufficiently" profitable. The RIAA may shed crocodile tears over the loss of revenue from this segment of their market, but in the end it is their own decision not to sell to these people.

By that argument, people who knowingly buy stolen goods such as stolen cars are not morally in the wrong.

Originally posted by Eli_Cash
A good question for you is, is it fair to have a law that lets you work once, and make money from that work for the rest of your life?

Yes, why not? What's wrong with making something and then charging people to use it?

Originally posted by Eli_Cash
And also my original question, is it stealing for me to get my widgets for free when someone else is selling them?

Possibly.