The Piracy
Hey guys everyone tell us that piracy makes a company to fall, it is illegal, reduces creativity(i dont know why), blah blah blah… But Pirating thigs saves the resource such as CD's/DVD's(which also saves power consuption and other resources too), many student who cant afford to buy a book will pirate thigs to gain knowledge, an artist will pirate a Movie/Games to increse his/her creativity, finally everythig should need a platform/software to view it so they pirate a software. These stuffs will improve mankind/manpower, intelligence, etc,. So why do these people are aiming to gain money for their own and simply put a word "Piracy".
I my self was changed due to piracy, without this one i couldn't imagine wat will happen to me.
Sorry if this post hurts you.;)
I think piracy sometimes its good well in my country at least, since Lebanon is a third world country and people are kinda poor so they wouldn't really be able to buy lets say a new DVD movie for 28$ instead they head to some places which sell pirated DVD and buy them for 2-3$ each depending on there clarity and stuff same for games i wouldn't be able to pay 50$ for a pc game which is 2 months old so i run to the store and buy one for 3$ + it's crack
dieslow_13 wrote: there is the internet but you can't do much with slow internet Check this out: BitMate
Tucak wrote: Check this out: BitMate
Thanks for sharing this, looks interesting.
Tucak wrote: [quote]dieslow_13 wrote: there is the internet but you can't do much with slow internet Check this out: BitMate[/quote] thanks for sharing this mate
Watch this:
ghostraider100 wrote: Watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4
Yes, copying isn't theft, but what about the artists? Thanks to the barrage of mediocre content that is thrown at you via TV and radio, independent artists/non-whore artists are struggling, while acts like Lady Gaga or Justin Bieber rake in millions. Heck, if you can align yourself with Murdoch, Warner or Disney it doesn't matter what you produce, it'll sell.
-Buy- music and film, just not the tasteless bland shovelware that the powers that be try to force feed you. Buy -directly- from artists.
For me,piracy is advantageous in two ways: 1.)It gives me almost free access to TONS of books,movies,etc..
and there is no loss to the authors either…since there's NO WAY that I am doling out thousands for books I dont know much about or going to the movies or getting dvds!!
2.)It gives me access to LOADS of materials that arent even available here!!
By the way..most of the technical books that are needed in studies are TOOOOOO costly for most students..the Libraries in college are good but 15-20 copies are barely enough for all the students..so most of the guys who cant afford good books go to second grade books….and loose good opportunities..So,piracy is good.
@ghostraider100: BSNL's unlimited 256 kBps is quite good..just leave the PC running at night..though remember to close of unneeded processes to help save some processing power(and electricity)..
one good example:EXPLORER.EXE you dont need it when you arent on the comp.:)
Moshbat caught distributing his own Music!!
SUCH A CRIME!!
To the topic: As long as you are sure you wouldnt anyway have PAID for the thing,there's no harm in downloading it.
But if you think you notice a GREAT software or something that you CAN buy,just go and buy it! :)
Cause while all the companies are evil and all,it really isnt a fair fight,you can pirate just about anything..and if a software seems stubborn and you are REALLY irritated,just dd(I never did this myself):)
Piracy is theft. It's their work you are stealing. If you ever make something worth while (probably never hope you prove me wrong though) you can give it away for free, others don't want to.
But, do we need copyright law? Yes, it ensures that when you invent something (spend time and money on it) you'll earn money back. Lets take the drug industry, people live shorter lives and indeed just die because they can't afford medicines which are sold at huge markups. The obvious solution is to stop companys owning a monopoly on drugs and sell them at a small profit over their cost.
How long would a drug company last in this situation? It wouldn't even exist… A single drug that makes it to market is backed by hundreds of thousands of compounds which didn't work at all, thousands which killed things more than they cured them hundreds which aren't worth making, dozens which are unusable due to side effects. A handful make it to regulation where most are dropped cause they don't work any better than what we have. In the end one makes it through and money spent on that single drug over a billion dollars.
That's not a throw away comment, that is a substantiated fact. So the drug that costs $2 to make cost billions to develop and wouldn't exist without copyright law.
Photoshop is an excellent piece of software which makes artists make fancy things. If you want a CS6 which is even better than CS5 then you need to be willing to pay the price. Also if people didn't pirate software photoshop would cost less (not much probs but less).
@Wolfmankurd: What you say is true,its their work being taken;however,if there is NO CHANCE that I might actually buy it off them..they arent getting a loss now are they??
Doesn't give you the right to take one. If it's life saving then of course there should be means for you to get one. Which is why the NHS is a great thing.
No one needs paid for music or paid for software…. there is open source alternatives for nearly EVERYTHING. Maybe if no body who couldn't afford PS had it people would be forced to work on GIMP.
But back to your point it's their idea it's up to them to decide if they want to give you one pro bono. Loads of products do student prices or even free for non-commercial use prices it should be at their discretion we can't take it cause we want it.
wolfmankurd wrote: Piracy is theft. It's their work you are stealing. If you ever make something worth while (probably never hope you prove me wrong though) you can give it away for free, others don't want to.
But, do we need copyright law? Yes, it ensures that when you invent something (spend time and money on it) you'll earn money back. Lets take the drug industry, people live shorter lives and indeed just die because they can't afford medicines which are sold at huge markups. The obvious solution is to stop companys owning a monopoly on drugs and sell them at a small profit over their cost.
How long would a drug company last in this situation? It wouldn't even exist… A single drug that makes it to market is backed by hundreds of thousands of compounds which didn't work at all, thousands which killed things more than they cured them hundreds which aren't worth making, dozens which are unusable due to side effects. A handful make it to regulation where most are dropped cause they don't work any better than what we have. In the end one makes it through and money spent on that single drug over a billion dollars.
That's not a throw away comment, that is a substantiated fact. So the drug that costs $2 to make cost billions to develop and wouldn't exist without copyright law.
Photoshop is an excellent piece of software which makes artists make fancy things. If you want a CS6 which is even better than CS5 then you need to be willing to pay the price. Also if people didn't pirate software photoshop would cost less (not much probs but less).
Outlining some positive elements and then saying "see, it works!" is not really fair. Try debating/debating yourself by offering some opposite viewpoints. For example: patent trolls, monopoly-abuse (see Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc.), organ availability vs. wealth of the organ recipient.
It's not perfect. Nothing's perfect, pointing out that things aren't perfect and giving no tangible alternative isn't useful. Try some constructive criticism for a change.
As far as I can see copyright law has given us much more than it's taken away. So what if you have to pay sega if you want to using a bouncing arrow in a game (that's a real patent btw) or if using slide to unlock pisses apple off. Without copyright law we wouldn't have the consoles and phones to be platforms for these problems….
Regardless, it comes down to a simple fact, copyright law exists (for good reason) and breaking it is theft. That's all that matters, everything else I've written is cherry on the icing of a simple cake.
wolfmankurd wrote: Regardless, it comes down to a simple fact, copyright law exists (for good reason) and breaking it is theft. That's all that matters, everything else I've written is cherry on the icing of a simple cake.
**World English Dictionary says: ** theft: The dishonest taking of property belonging to another person with the intention of depriving the owner permanently of its possession
If the loss of potential sales count as theft, then what about bad game reviews? Missed release dates? Pretty fucking much anything can cause of a loss of a sale. How is piracy any more of a "theft"?
The entire idea of "potential sales" is bullshit, and is just some crappy term made up in an attempt to justify sueing the hell out of everyone. There is no loss in copying. In fact, I personally believe copying leads to more profit for the creator. The majority of bands I support? Pirated their music originally. My favorite video games? Pirated them first, too. What about the movies I buy? Yup, downloaded a copy before hand. Would I listen to Disturbed if I had to pay for it originally? Unlikely. Play Minecraft? Definitely not. Bought the Tron soundtrack? Of course not.
What you think of piracy is your own personal opinion. However, it is definitely not theft.
It's not loss of potential gains, if you take it then it's stealing. It does not matter how much money they will get in the long run. It isn't your choice the makers did not want you to download their stuff you took it by force. End of. Even if you were then to send them a billion dollars you still stole.
I agree that you have missed the point entirely. You bought up the concept of potential loss and then quoted me dismissing the idea of potential loss as evidence in your argument. I'll assume it was a late night and you aren't just a moron.
Anyways, if you read above I said "It's their work you are stealing". Ultimately, the law creates a contract. To use someones work, you need their agreement, usually they ask for money. If you take something without paying, it's theft. In case you are just a moron this diagram might help.
Oh the irony!
wolfmankurd wrote: If you take something without paying, it's theft.
Unless they are permanently deprived of that something, it's not theft by definition. That's all I was saying. Yes, against the law under other acts. No, not theft by definition. Everything else is opinion, really.
British Law:
A person shall be guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.
Canadian Law:
A person steals a thing if he or she takes or converts it fraudulently, without colour of right and with intent to deprive the owner of it, either permanently or temporarily.
United States handles theft on a state level, if I remember correctly, so I'm not going to bother going out and finding all of those. I'd bet they say something to the same effect, however.
In case you are just a moron this diagram might help.
While you're at it, let's also compare piracy to the holocaust. Adds more "effect", ya know?
We're not arguing under any specific jurisdiction so I'd say we have to be open/general about the definitions. Theft is stealing.
Since no one has made an argument against mine regarding piracy being wrong, I take it as given that we are in agreement. The anally retentive amongst you( read stealth) feel free to argue over the semantics of what words should be used to describe why it's wrong.
wolfmankurd wrote: We're not arguing under any specific jurisdiction so I'd say we have to be open/general about the definitions. Theft is stealing.
Since no one has made an argument against mine regarding piracy being wrong, I take it as given that we are in agreement. The anally retentive amongst you( read stealth) feel free to argue over the semantics of what words should be used to describe why it's wrong.
See, We are not talkin' about pirating oil's or any other real world objects. Which leads to less in our resource, which is considered as the crime and i'm also against that . But, If we pirate in this virtual world its like sharing resources without shortage. Here no company is affected instead they have increase in their customer so there is no loss, only profit. Pirating acts like an ad for those things. There are tons of thing which can be written good about pirating in this virtual world.
Film these days cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to make. If we download the movies for free, there is a lot of revenue lost. Sure they can make money via merchandising, but that's not going to cover the budget of the movie itself.
Software companies have to employ people to write their code, if we pirate it for free, you are shitting on the people who spent many hours it took to produce the product. Once the company starts loosing money, there will be pay-cuts and lay-offs. As mentioned before though, there are plenty of open-source alternatives.