Copyright Laws, etc.

[Baker]

Recently Steve Jobs got a lot of attention for calling for the end of DRM for music downloads. The argument is that it doesn't stop piracy (people rip the songs from CDs, which account for 90% of sales vs. 10% being the internet) and just annoys everyone.

Meanwhile, I think of games that -- unlike Quake -- don't release their source codes and what happens is that eventually the source code gets lost and in the future you have to use an emulator (DOSBox, etc.) to play the game on a later operating system vs. someone taking the source and updating it (tons of games have this problem).

And 2 weeks ago when I got a new computer I discovered that 2 of my CDs were scratched so of all things I needed to use BitTorrent to illegally download 2 games that I already own.

Google got into some -- not trouble -- but got into a controversy by scanning thousands and thousands of books for Google books. 99% of the books they scanned are probably not ones that anyone would buy or even know existed.

I wonder when the world is going to catch up with the copyright laws and/or when businesses will catch up with the business practices that work for the long term.

Supposedly when you buy a CD, you only have the license to listen to the songs. I can agree with that. I had some CDs stolen a few years back and I downloaded them off the internet to get the songs back (I paid for the license to listen to them, someone stealing them didn't change that, did it?) and occasionally thought what I'd say to RIAA if I got sued.

Things I've thought about lately:

1. Is it wrong to watch shows on YouTube? There are a lot of them that I know shouldn't be there.

2. They keep extending the copyright period. They extended it in the 1970's and then again into the 1990's to save Mickey Mouse (or something) and it used to be life + 50 years and now it is life + 95 years.

3. Are we going to lose a lot of stuff because it is illegal to archive it?

4. Since "they" (governments) never address these issues, it is funny that by doing nothing that people just take these things up on their own right (PiratesBay). The downside is that by doing nothing and not addressing these things, there is no distinction between "honest/considerate piracy" and "I want something for free that is sold today piracy".

/Random thoughts

[Mindf!3ldzX]

Corporate America will always have the Goverments attention before the rights of any consumer. The only way a consumer will defeat corporate america is if they have a legitimate stand point,and the supreme court realizes that,other wise, money talks and bullshit walks.

[Solecord]

I had some CDs stolen a few years back and I downloaded them off the internet to get the songs back (I paid for the license to listen to them, someone stealing them didn't change that, did it?)

Devil's advocate...

You paid for your car. If someone steals your car, since you paid for a car, does that give you the right to go out and steal another car? Substitute car with basically any object you can purchase and own. Two wrongs don't make a right...

[R00k]

Devil's advocate...

You paid for your car. If someone steals your car, since you paid for a car, does that give you the right to go out and steal another car? Substitute car with basically any object you can purchase and own. Two wrongs don't make a right...

Ah, but the reproduction of that "car" didnt cost anything, and was produced by a 3rd party, a facsimile, not the real product.
If we could product physical objects like Star-Trek's holodeck, then creating multiples of your posessions maybe illegal, but restoring backups (from any source), to obtain the level the licence allowed should be legal. (phew i havent had enpough coffee)

[=peg=]

more coffee! great idea

[Solecord]

Ah, but the reproduction of that "car" didnt cost anything, and was produced by a 3rd party, a facsimile, not the real product.
If we could product physical objects like Star-Trek's holodeck, then creating multiples of your posessions maybe illegal, but restoring backups (from any source), to obtain the level the licence allowed should be legal. (phew i havent had enpough coffee)

Maybe it should be legal but it's not, so no matter if the reproduction of the "car" is made by a 3rd party for no cost or not, the 3rd party has no right to distribute it.

Back to Baker's orginal statmenet - you paid for a license to listen to your physical copy of the CD, not someone else's reproduced copy. Buying the CD gives you the right to listen to it... reproducing it and making it available to anyone else is a violation of the license. Thus when you go to get a reproduction of it online, the copy itself is in violation of the license so you are too by getting it.

[Net-Tyme]

I believe they do allow you to make a backup copy knowing the scratch potential of their product.

[Solecord]

yay but they don't allow you to take that copy and distribute it to others.

[Net-Tyme]

Well no.. and you shouldn't..cough.. 1 user per product only. What frosts my cookies is I have a desktop and a laptop.. I use both.. I buy software and it says ONE Machine.. bah.. Thats like telling me I can only watch a movie on one dvd player in my house. But you can store your backups on a virtual drive Baker. You just can't direct people to it. But.. machines get hacked.. who's to say you gave out the site or the pass?

[Canadian*Sniper]

In Canada there's no huge law against file sharing =D

[Baker]

Devil's advocate...

You paid for your car. If someone steals your car, since you paid for a car, does that give you the right to go out and steal another car? Substitute car with basically any object you can purchase and own. Two wrongs don't make a right...

Well, I didn't "own" the songs on the CD, according to how copyright law works. I paid for the right to use them.

I wouldn't have been permitted to take a CD copier and make 500 copies and sell them because I only paid for the license for personal use, I didn't "own" them.

While having my CDs stolen, I lost the physical copy but I would argue that I still was the one that paid for the license for personal use.

So the person that stole my CDs was the one violating the law by listening to them, that person never paid for the license :d

/That's my story and I'm sticking to it. (b) (b)

[R00k]

In Canada there's no huge law against file sharing =D

Ya ya we're not talking about trading cousin_girlfriends....

oh wait you said FILE sharing NOT VILE sharing..

and BTW "=D" looks like a penis

dont use HUGE and that "=D" in the same post please!

{there's no HUGE law against Vile sharing (penis), in CANADA!} OMG!

[Canadian*Sniper]

Anyone trying to make sense out of r00k's post is going to have a hernia

[Grim]

Here's a site I stop by on occasion. It has a few articles that catch the eye... like this one.

Clicky

[Baker]

Here's a site I stop by on occasion. It has a few articles that catch the eye... like this one.

Clicky

Very good link :d

It is funny that they will invest all of that time and energy into those systems and mostly have 3 results:

1. Everyone will get annoyed because it [won't work, is a hassle, gets obsolete, can't use it how you want to].

2. The 0.1% of talented hackers will defeat it anyway and upload it as a torrent and same 15% of people (or whatever the statistic is) will still download it for free anyway.

3. They will sell about the same $$$ as they always did.

I think most of the people that pirate stuff do it as a hobby and would never be purchasing it anyway (most are either kids or don't have a lot of money or just want to see/try different things).

I think most of the people that don't pirate stuff don't do it because they don't see the need or don't feel that it is the right way to do things.

Really, DRM is a big time expenditure to make sure kids and poor people don't steal downloads ... which is funny because those people don't have any money and wouldn't be buying it anyway.