Copyright Infringement, Intellectual Property and Pirating

I've been meaning to add something to this thread and I just remembered what it was.

Recently, I was fiddling through the Mises Institute YouTube channel, looking for some videos on American history for Nate. I came upon an interview with Mark Thornton, a member of the Institute, talking about the Frederic Bastiat collection the Institute had assembled.

Bastiat was a French philosopher, businessman and politician. A true advocate of laissez-faire. But who he is specifically is not so important as the collection that was assembled.

If you understand the concept of the long tail, it doesn't get a whole lot more long tail in mainstream economics than Bastiat. There was, I can only presume, missing works and essays, many things not translated from French etc.

The Institute was inspired to assemble a collection of his works, a master collection if you will. Mark Thornton took on the project, and with a handful of private small donors, Bastiat's work was collected, compiled, translated and put into print. If this wasn't done, there was no other such collection available. There is a good chance, that with free marketers and laissez-faire liberals an almost extinct species that such great works may have been lost forever.

Then today, I happened across this article.

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...s-will-take-only-minutes-to-print-851587.html

Someone has now produced a machine that will literally create books out of thin air, in only a few minutes, revolutionizing the brick and mortar book business.

Anyway, I just thought it was an interesting anecdote about so-called IP and how what was lost, unprofitable and unpublished, can be found, collected, published, and perhaps soon, available at your local bookstore, produced on demand.

 

'kay, a blurb about voluntary philanthropy, always part of the picture when it comes to preserving and making public noted works - try Edmund Burke for such a revolutionary concept - from a guy dead over 150 years, whose works are in the public domain; and

A British foray into printing a bound book on demand, at a fee, as already exists in the States:

http://www.thebookseller.com/news/61423-blackwell-brews-up-espresso.html

Revenue streams, incremental trade, out of stock books. In other words, an addition to a shop's bottom line, by - hold on, now - SELLING THE BOOKS. Most people call this a kind of money. Another view:

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2007/6/prweb534914.htm

Not exactly the "steal for jollies and profit" as espoused by some, at least one, on this thread.

'Course, doesn't do a thing to support the notion or otherwise justify stealing work, but a great if overused way to get the thread diffused to a new page, in my opinion.

*******

Anyone - any other creative ways to try to cloak the notion that it's cool to simply rip off an author's work? Or, those in agreement with such a philosophy as weakly attempted in the post above, can we just now call a spade a spade, admit it's better to steal another's work rather than write something worthy oneself, and move on?

********

Moving on: off-topic, but so was introducing the notion of books on demand. since these books, sold, have zero to do with ripping off an author's work, the topic at hand in this thread.

A mini-rant: Books-on-demand is a great concept - in its scope of works, it is efficient and realizes savings, so everyone benefits by acquiring titles that haven't born inventory encumbrances; authors and publishers get paid, and we have a happy Amazon customer, for example.

That said, there are some of us who treasure first editions (among other quality editions and runs) of great works, seeing books as tangible, worthy things to pass on to our children. Not all the world comes at the click of a button, and this idiotic attempt to distill all life's learning down to questions of convenience and speed - youtube, wiki, a fount of knowledge from one website - well, let me state a bit of my philosophy, which is that this is the problem with so much in modern life. We are getting smarter and smarter at growing dumber and dumber.

 

Agreed.

Just wondering though, what happens when someone's hard work for a company goes largely unnappreciated, with neither recognition, nor compensation commensurate with the company's gain thanks to the contribution of said "someone" while in the company's employ? Both scenarios suggest the right of "intellectual property."

When someone steals from, say, a songwriter, is this any less odious than the company who over-looks the man who created the recipe, say, for the Big Mac? Or Ken Kesey having to sit back and watch his book 'One Flew over the Cuck-oo's Nest' turned into a movie of international acclaim and finacial reward, and not receive a dime, simply because he sold the rights so many years before? I'm not saying it's illegal, I'm saying it's immoral.

Imagine being the food tech who somehow wound up putting that miniscule batch of chutney in the Big Mac Sauce which, without anyone knowing, gives it it's distinctive flavor, and holds it together so well. It MAKES the Big Mac. But after making this sauce one late night, for your $5.35 per hour, you get fired by your shift manager, so he can claim the laurels?

Intellectual property, though...

 

Every interested party argues in favor of its rights, often irrationally so. The music companies make a claim of irrational rights like being able to collect damages without proving their case in court, or charging $X0,000 per $1 song. There wouldn't be a debate if everyone's demands were reasonable!

So there are licensing technicalities that a lot of people won't necessarily know about. Of course ignorance of the law is no excuse, but we probably have a few million laws here by now.

Well this is just my example that some of the IP owners are making their own unreasonable claims. AP wants a $12 fee for every quote of five or more words, regardless of whether or not you're linking to them. Several of the complains were that people had copied the title in the link back to their article! Obviously, to try to stop people from giving you natural backlinks with good anchor text is um, retarded.

Do they have a property right to say how there content is used, or is there a greater public good served by the flow of information, news, debate, and policy analysis that gives a public claim to some sort of rights? Obviously, the fair use law opens that door but most of the industries would love to shut it back up completely.

So I think there has to be some form of bargaining, but I fear that most of the content owners aren't the same as the content creators. The content consumers want their say, and the anarchist profiteers will continue to make their money on the edges of the law no matter where its set. Heck, stricter laws tend to just make underground-market profit margins better.

Not really, because I think most musicians who have ever worked in the industry understand its a business built on copying, free distribution, and derivative works. The standard way to pay the bills is cover songs. Covers by bands established in their own right are integral to showing tribute and organizing the historical evolution of the derivative works and copying.

Should Metallica have made so much money off their Garage Days demo tapes and secured a following and contract with it since the majority of those songs were written by and the intellectual property of other bands ?

So 20 years later when they go complaining about the bootlegs of their concerts and people copying their music I don't have very much sympathy because I see a hypocrisy of a musician who used the system as it had been and now wanted to change things because they had already made it.

 

I hope this wasn't directed at me. I've already been falsely labeled a warez dealer/enabler/user in this thread, and now recently, somehow an example has morphed into my being a website cloner.

The obsessive nonsense about starting a new page in a thread (which I have never considered when posting, it's irrelevant what post # or page a post appears on, it's a threaded forum) is already too much IMO.

I might end up an anarchist one day, our government and laws are totally corrupt, but I still believe in reform, and I never advise anyone not to obey the unjust laws, but work to change them.

 

No.

In a thread entitled: " Warez Forum 26k members Income average $920 a month",

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=7472289

Based on posts in this thread, make your conclusion, folks.

On "it's traffic, not content," that is a site's value (and content doesn't have a hand in traffic? Logic isn't a strong suit, I realize, but still...), and "I'm not into website cloning":

TAKE THE CONTENT. "REBRAND" IT. PRESTO. "DIFFERENT." MINE.

"Using":

Copy something in toto, for one's purposes, screw the original author/artist. Yes. This is using. It's also theft. And most recently, attempting to justify it with the example of a PAID SERVICE, "expresso machines/books on demand." Best belly-flop I've yet seen from this poster, as it exemplifies the argument - people should, and like to, get paid for their work - beautifully.

Hmm...this poster has argued for the privatization of police forces, fire departments, and so forth. He has also expressed, in so many words, and so many times, variations on:

Plenty more here. Again, you decide, folks.

Perhaps its just the poster's confusion over what he actually believes. From what I see, he is an anarchist, who believes other's ideas are his to profit off of. I cannot support either "idea."

 

well on torrent sharing site like piratebay.org

i have seen that there servers are on sweden....and there reply on pirating is that there is no such sweden law that binds pirating or torrenting...and they saw that us law dont apply in sweden so get any lawyer as they want

seems pre planned and using laws of different countries to use this kind of stuff

 

I don't think for long. Sweden has gone after Pirate Bay:

http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-team-charged-080131/

And I agree with this sentiment:

The thing is, most of us know it's just wrong - even those who do it. My liberal brother in law, for example, sheepishly admitted he regularly pirates music - while proclaiming many other stands on principle, regularly. Love the guy, but call bullshit. As here.

 

to the question:

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=902544

I would agree. It doesn't usually work too good.

I see that Guerilla is again, as he has several times in this thread, turning to the DP "state" to report something I've said:



Not sure what I've done to break any DP rules, Guerilla. You apparently at one time had the ear of a mod with his own personal issue with me, but as you can see, the admins were not amused:



Continue to turn to reporting everything I say - your right, of course. But does this really strengthen anything you have to say?

 

I can't stop the proliferation of lies and personal attacks directed against me. I've tried. It poisons threads and only serves the ego of my accuser.

I do business @ DP. I've even done business with some of the people in P&R. Unlike my accused, I own websites, I code a little PHP now, I design HTML and CSS by hand. I run Drupal, vbulletin, WordPress, TextPattern, and a couple custom CMSes.

I can tolerate confrontation on my personal political or social views. But when someone outright lies that I am a thief, on a forum devoted to the very industry he claims I am stealing from, I feel that affects my ability to do commerce.

The admin, Crazy Rob advised both myself and my stalker to leave each other alone. I have ignored what is probably 100 posts since that time. And daily post after post is directed at me, by my stalker, COUNTER to what the admin has told him to do.

I reported some posts a week or two ago, and the infractions were reversed. So apparently the powers that be feel that it is appropriate for this behavior to occur in P&R when it isn't condoned anywhere else on the forum.

I think it's pretty obvious to everyone who is doing the stalking, obsessing and attacking. It's not me. And I will make another appeal, and continue to make appeals through the report system until this poster has been incentivized through infractions or advised AGAIN to leave me alone.

I've tried the high road. I don't think that is too much to ask.

Now, let's get back to topic.

 

Oh, please. Nothing ever changes. Your idea of "ignoring" and "taking the high road" is to do things like insult my fatherhood, (context here, for example), and otherwise resort to personal attacks - calling me "deranged," etc.

I no longer know whether it's a case of a just how odd it is to see a guy whining to the mods at every turn, when from what I see he engages in the very behavior he is reporting on (customarily doing the same to all others on the forum who make a good counter-argument to his positions), or you know how hypocritical this is, but hope it flies under the smokescreen. Either way, Guerilla, it isn't working, in my opinion.

And we very much are on topic. I don't agree with your views, almost exclusively. You assert your views quite aggressively. I will likely respond, with points supporting my argument.

In this thread alone, what you are trying to defend by any means is in my mind indefensible - I do not agree with the notion that it's morally or legally acceptable to lift another's work, in toto, without permission. This is the subject of this thread, and I will respond to it. If this is intolerable to you, and you feel "stalked," feel free to continue reporting my posts, as you are, or stop attempting to defend theft - which is what I strongly believe it is.

 

Like your bizarre obsession with people making posts that make a new page of a thread (try threaded mode, hybrid mode, or custom posts per page settings), this makes absolutely no sense.

I wasn't referring to you with the "fatherhood" post. Of course, your narcissism wouldn't allow you to consider that I could be posting to anyone else. Now when you are being ignored, you start imagining I am writing about you, which is probably why you obsessively stare at my user profile, screen capping my position and action on the forum and presenting it in posts. This is not normal, healthy social behavior.

And the deranged comment was already explained. Your actions are deranged, whether you are, is for someone else to determine. I'm not a psychologist. Seriously, the level of stalking going on, maybe you should re-examine your own behavior. You've plead numerous times to ignore and move on, even receiving that advice from Rob. And still you persist.

You wouldn't even have received that comment if not for your behavior and dozen posts that went un-responded to before that.

Do I need to go back over the last 4 weeks and total up (with links) the number of posts you have made about or to me, compared to what, the 2 or 3 I have made to you? And mine, only in response to your continued harassment?

See, this is an example of a lie you are spreading. Do you have any proof of this? I'm curious to know when and who I have been reporting in order for you to make this charge? Or is it just that, another lie you are trying to post about me?

You've been writing with slander and personal attacks. I have been ignoring you as much as I possibly can. If you could confine your comments to the subject, that would be one thing. When you intentionally spread lies, it is another.

Mature people don't spread lies if they disagree with a position. They discuss the merits and deficits of the argument.

What is intolerable, and should be to everyone engaged in business online through this forum, is that someone would resort to calling another person a thief by twisting a philosophical discussion with examples, into something more nefarious and character damaging.

You have no proof, no admission of such, and in fact, I have vehemently denied the charges you keep making against me. That you persist totally undermines any claim you have to participating on the merit of the subject.

My request is simple. LEAVE ME ALONE.

 

The size of text will not change what we have before us.

Your comment to Firegirl:

Was very much directed to me - as it was in the same subject, in another thread:

Which is why I provided the links to show how, and why, I made the claim. It is your custom to attack me personally, to include my fatherhood, and then cry foul after the fact. I don't like it, although I don't seem to find the need to run crying to the mods every time you do it. I have provided the link, in fact, to this, and to your usage of "deranged," because as I expected you would plead one thing, while doing another. You may be really, really bothered that I don't let this kind of thing slide. Tough nuggets, Guerilla. I'd suggest you don't engage in the tactic, then.

I am not slandering, which requires that I am lying. I am not lying, as these are your stands and statements, and no one else's. Again, if you don't wish for me - or anyone - to take contention with your stands, don't make them. I know you asked the DP admins to ban me over your plea that I have engaged in a "campaign" against you, that's just not the case. This is a forum, and not Guerilla's personal living room.

You asked for "proof" of your posting hypocrisy. I provided proof - you reported me, several times, while calling me "deranged," as you have had the temerity to call me "psychotic," etc., in the past. That's from this thread, from among bundles of threads, and your behavior isn't limited to me:

This is a personal attack, yet:

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=8239178&postcount=18

and

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=8239717&postcount=32

and

htp://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=8239717&postcount=32

and

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=8253172&postcount=65

And on, and on, are somehow exemplars of civility. I cannot agree.

At any rate, oversized text aside, we have a thread about piracy, and a discussion on same, before us. Your continued defense of the practice will be met with a continued, reasoned contention against it.

 

If I wanted to say I think you are a lousy father, who spends hours each day online stalking me when you could be doing something productive or spending time with your family, then I would. I don't need to make veiled comments at you. I would come at them directly. I always have whether I was pointing out apparent mental illness, or unreasonable and irrational behavior.

You asked me not to comment on your family, and I have not. You're grasping at straws, which seems part and parcel with your obsessive behavior, screen capping my every movement on this forum, and lying in wait for hours at a time observing my activity.

Did you provide the link where I say that I clarified that I was not calling you deranged? Of course not. that doesn't feed your paranoia and narcissism. You have to maintain the illusion, that even when I am not posting to you, and ignoring your personal attacks, somehow there are coded responses, and only you can see them.



As far as letting things slide, you're the one chasing me from thread to thread. The other day, you quote me from memorial day, just to make another attack, for absolutely no reason at all. It's a sign of sickness.

If you are not slandering,

where is your proof that I use warez?

where is your proof that I steal websites?

where is your proof that I report my ideological enemies on the forum?

These are three claims you have made. As you claim you don't lie, surely you can back them up? Please, share with everyone your proof.

You've reported me for the "psychotic" posts, I have received the infractions and got past them. That was months ago Paul, and still you try to bring them up over and over, particularly since you have been told to ignore me by Rob, and like wise I was told the same and have made a very serious effort to live up to that.

I have asked you repeatedly to leave me alone. That I feel that you are continually harassing me. Why you refuse to stop making personal attacks, and spreading lies is beyond me, but it is not healthy social behavior, and I am having a hard time understanding why DP continues to allow it.

Rob's PM to me, in case you have forgotten

Btw, I'm not going to play this game where I satisfy your need for attention all weekend. The only person this discussion serves is you, and your insatiable need to be the center of attention.

 

Comical, since the paragraph is contradictory, and is itself an attack on my fatherhood. Add to this that the links are there, for all to see, Guerilla, and you don't have anything to stand on. As always.

And you again call me mentally ill, suffering from "paranoia" and "narcissism," which is, as usual, a personal attack.

I will repeat what I have said, regarding your apparent warez interest:

In other words, your inquiring on whether a warez site is available, on a thread devoted to its selling, squares with the philosophy as I see you post here. The two things make sense to me, as I have said.

The rest of the crap, regarding "proof," has already been provided. I can repeat the posts, and statements, but it is meaningless. I earlier provided some of the "proof" statements, and links. I have drawn my conclusions and others may do what they will. In my world, the world of books, did you, or did you not say you feel you have the right to copy the book, in toto, and hand it out at will? That the author "owns" nothing? Please.

I don't know what you're talking about regarding "posting of ideological enemies on the forum," except, typically, I didn't say this. I said you report posts over seemingly "uncivilized" behavior, while engaging in uncivilized behavior yourself. And provided proof. I call this hypocrisy.

Guerilla, this is a public forum. You post to the tune of 18+ posts per day, which is your right. But you somehow will have to accept this isn't your living room, and as I, I guess, am one of the people most strongly in disagreement with the preponderance of the views you come up with, the odds are very good you're going to get a response to the view from me. If this is something that you just can't handle, feel free to continue reporting all my posts, or, I'd suggest, leave - as I'm going to continue to post thoughts as I see fit.

Why you continue to publically post a PM from Rob is beyond me. I haven't done the same, though it's been tempting to do so, I must admit; but it' s wrong.

 

Don't worry I'm not interested in witch hunts and forum personality wars... Just a general statement about npk's complaint that people are going to make money at the edge of the law.

 

To clarify, Korr. I asked you:

To which you replied:

Now:

This author's entire book copied and used at will, the CD copied and used at will, the website from which "content is unimportant," taking that content, and "rebranding it" to "create something different."

Given your response above, are these examples of theft, or are they not?

By the way, I agree with much of your post above. AP, especially, has been ridiculous, and we need to find a better way that preserves reasonableness, for creators, and users. I also didn't know this about Metallica, and the implications of the example raises valid food for thought.

 

I usually try to avoid to post about a subject that I have no clear thought or opinion about since it doesn't contribute very much to the discussion but on this subject, I have some questions that i hope by posting it, people will discuss and help me to form my own opinion.

1) Is intellectual property a real property? Yes, it is.
2) Do the owners of IP have right to compensation? Yes, they do.
3) Is stealing an IP product a theft? Yes, it is.

The above I am clear about but the question is more than so. While most of these questions in regard to music and movie (non essential products) can clear itself by market forces (people refuse to buy too expensive products), what happens to products that are essential for individuals and nations?

Should people in third world countries stop using computers because window and Microsoft office costs more than $500 which can be a year salary for that person?
should a country let it's people die of a disease by refusing to produce generic version of drug because of patent and since they can not afford to buy the original?
Should people go hungry and not increase production because the seed is genetically altered and it has a patent?
How did we in west came to hold all these patents? If the engine of industrial revolution was the wealth from India and colonizing it, isn't our wealth which includes IP, a result of theft itself?
Part of the concept of private property, is having the means to protect it by force, so if we don't have the mean to protect the property, can we really complain about other people taking it and try to give it some kind moral aspect?
This reminds me of a cartoon that I saw awhile back. Two guys meet in a forest and one guy is cutting a tree. The second guy says, you can't cut the tree, it belongs to me. The first guy asks, how come this forest belongs to you? The second guy answers, my ancestor fought your ancestor in 1470 for this forest and killed him and since that time this forest belongs to us. The first guy says, no problem, let's fight for it again and then beats up the second guy.

 

Right on Target my friend... Those are the questions that need to be answered. Awesome...

 

Used for personal purposes? Did the person buy a copy of the product originally that got damaged? To meet a demand society creates at a reasonable price (where do you think the DJ at the wedding got that odd song someone requested?)

I think there has to be some demonstration of financial loss, and I think that's what our Fair Use laws are all about.

Well, that's something I have to deal with as a content writer on the internet, but I also knew what I was getting into when I put stuff out there.

Is there any feasible solution to stop this, globally? Are we just going to crack down on it in our own citizens while the content goes on being copied anyway?

As a matter of law and economics, I'm not sure what good is accomplished.

I don't see really simple answers there, I need more information

Musicians copying musicians is huge part of the evolution in the industry. Metallica is a great example on so many levels. Not only did their first demo cover five previously published songs, they also kicked Dave Mustaine out of the band and kept the music he had written for their first professionally produced album, Kill 'Em All.

Dave ended up republishing one of the songs with his own lyrics and now almost 30 years later Megadeth and Metallica both still claim ownership. Four Horsemen may have had the high quality production and made the money, but Mechanix had the obvious technical skill. Which band am I ripping off if I go to Youtube to hear the comparisons of the tracks?

In the mid-80s, both these bands got their initial coverage from bootlegged copies of their concerts since the heavy sound couldn't get any coverage on the radio or MTV. Fan piracy created millions more fans - duplicating content led to duplicating enthusiasm. Metallica even bootlegged the bootlegs, buying videos from flea markets and pawn shops to make video collections to sell. 20 years later in the legal environment they helped create, they could have been liable for their whole run-down van full of musical equipment if they had been sued for ripping off the songs from Dave and the bootleg collections wouldn't exist because they'd be sitting in a court evidence locker.

Led Zeppelin was always in and out of court, fighting charges of plagiarism. Usually they tried to settle out of court, Jimmy Page would say: "I always tried to bring some thing fresh to anything that I used. I always made sure to come up with some variation. In fact, I think in most cases, you would never know what the original source could be." This attitude is extremely common among musicians because thats the way music works. You can write a new song, you can copy one that exists or change it to fit a different style (that you're copying) or whatever - just go do it, promote it, and make some money on it (if you can).

So its kind of funny to me, looking down the line of music history I just see a bunch of people copying each other. Now copying is supposed to be some kind of big problem and the guys saying that represent some company that owns all of this music that was copied from other music. And the new music sucks - its not even worth stealing.

Don't get me started on Hollywood. All that stuff is just poorly ripped off from literature to begin with.

"I took someone else's ideas but I put a lot of time and money into them so no one else can take them from me now!" That's basically what I'm hearing from the record labels and movie producers with the luxuries of time and money to take these issues to court.