A new ridiculous EU law - for whom it may concern
European Union (EU) has proposed a law which forbids any form of transferring music and other digital information bought on CDs for private use to other mediums, including MP3, CD, and DVD so far. This means, if you bought a music CD, you could face charges if you as little as burned a copy of it to listen to in your car stereo. How is that for a democracy ?
I personally think, this is an example on our hands, which tells how delusive and abusive word like "democracy" can be, and that in reality only thing that seems to matter to many is cashflow and power. Sad thought indeed. If this law should be accepted, I am afraid piracy will accelerate to skyhigh levels, at least because of people's bitterness over such a braindead, unweighted and ignorant and egoistic proposal for a law. Such a law will be hard to maintain.
In Denmark the law is stepping into power on December the 22th. Who's next ? Norway is most likely to obey this political failure as well - upcoming summer. How are things in U.S ? Or Asia ? Or Australia ?
Please, make yourself useful - vote...vote here, and vote wherever you live...
Rephrasing a popular quote:
"Never underestimate stupid corrupted politicians in large groups".
Re: A new ridiculous EU law - for whom it may concern
Amn, it is clear that you're not a supporter of intellectual property. The whole point of the law is that it tries to promote democracy, not inhibit it. It's protecting the rights of the person who created the material. If someone worked for years on something that could be copied, such as decoding the human genome, composing a masterful piece of music, writing a world-class novel, etc. then it's not fair for you to take it from them for free just because you can. They put man-hours into their work, and that translates to money. If you pay enough for it, fine, you can have it, but otherwise it's their property because they put effort into making it. This is the idea behind intellectual property.
In this country (not sure about internationally, but it's likely to be the same), the most frequently broken law - by far - is copying copyrighted materials. Of course there aren't going to be policemen patrolling your home for copied stuff and throwing you in prison for it because it's so common. But I know some people who won't even listen to a burned CD because it's not "fair" to the person who originally made the songs.
Let me give you an example. Look at the computer you're using right now. To create the hardware and software, to make factories creating these, to market it, the years and years of research and theory in the field of computers, the millions of man-hours spent creating these items, and the meticulous refinement of every aspect must be worth a lot. That's a no-brainer. Now, imagine you could copy this computer. You can have a completely identical computer - in fact, you can have as many as you want - for only a ten cents ($.10) each. Do you want another one? Sure you do. Go on, nobody will know. Now let's say the computer companies have put all these billions of dollars into creating these machines we have today, but they get no profit. Big deal, right? You already have all you want from them? Well, they'll be discouraged from continuing research, etc. because costs are high and income is in the basement. They go out of business. 10 years from now, think of all the great stuff we will have - but wait a sec, the companies all went out of business, right? We're stuck here. It's simply too dangerous for a company to risk itself and millions of dollars to create a computer, have it sell about a dozen times and then no more, because people are copying it endlessly. It's all about money. You can't expect the companies to exist without them making a profit somehow. The same thing exists for intellectual property - and the profit comes from your wallet.
You have to get the creator's consent. If they say it's free, then you've committed no crime at all. But if they say their work is worth $100, even if you think this price is outrageous, it's a crime to own it for $99 or less. Because you've stolen money from the owner of the property.
As for my opinion - go for it, you can't stop the masses from copying this stuff. But morally it's wrong. As long as you keep this in mind, then whatever you do will fall on your own conscience alone. But if you get caught, you've never met me ;)
the point of my questions
You see, there is always copy. There is always theft. There is always violation of rights. And the law has always done its best to minimize abuse of rights (as they are currently defined by a particular society). But working in the security has shown me something important, that there is not much to be scared about. I think often the mainstream media feeds a sense of doomsday into popular culture, but much of these types of claims are false. MP3s are no worse of a threat than cassettes. You can buy a thousand dollar (even 500 dolloar, these days) computer and download mp3s and pass them to your friends or burn CDs. I knew many friends in the 80s that did the same with cassettes, with a 50 dollar tape recorder and cassettes costs that would keep total price competitive with computer costs of today. There is always a particular population of society that is involved in this form of activity. The purpose of security is to provide as much exposure of these illegal activities as possible so as to discourage this segment of society as much as possible. This is why security has always seemed to have struggles with privacy. But really, there are some quite comfortable ways of making security continue to make the field of music profitable. Not much more than is currently available is actually needed, because that segment of the population that pirates has always been less than would be required to make music profitable. Its just a normal ebb and flow of a subpopulation.
Perhaps, however, it is time the music industry needs to realize that certain of their desires in a rights model are not possibly enforceable without major privacy breaking. And perhaps, just maybe, they need to realize that giving up some of these preferences for direct control of the circumstances of particular digital copy procedures in the name of privacy rights will not do them much harm. Since they have not been in control of that particular right of copy for years, and have managed to make quite a lot of money. And I do not have fears on the horizon of sudden collapse of the industry, though such fears seem quite common. I think the industry will change slowly into a more artist-centred paradigm, but I fear that many of the big companies today won't survive the transition. Because they seem to appear to be of the Homo neophobic variety, and not able to recognize the new proftable distribution models available to them with the new technologies...
Re: Re: A new ridiculous EU law - for whom it may concern
Quote:
Originally posted by solarflare
Amn, it is clear that you're not a supporter of intellectual property. The whole point of the law is that it tries to promote democracy, not inhibit it.
Oh yes I am. I am not 15 anymore. I AM willing to pay for music i want to listen to.
Quote:
It's protecting the rights of the person who created the material. If someone worked for years on something that could be copied, such as decoding the human genome, composing a masterful piece of music, writing a world-class novel, etc. then it's not fair for you to take it from them for free just because you can. They put man-hours into their work, and that translates to money. If you pay enough for it, fine, you can have it, but otherwise it's their property because they put effort into making it. This is the idea behind intellectual property.
I dont take it from them, i buy it and want to not to bother with big ugly CDs, when there is so much more compact MP3s. What is it I own ? Do I own the right to distribute that CD for my own private use, after all I payed for it ?! Or i only have the right to listen to that single CD i bought ? What do i do when it will have scratches on it ? Buy a new copy ? Or ASK for a new copy ? Isn't it obvious that the industry simply tries to make money on us ? What is it they sell goddamn it ?!??!?!?!?!?! SHOW ME WHAT YOU ARE SELLING ?! CAN YOU SHOW ME IT IN DAYLIGHT ?
<- There is the core of the problem. When you buy an apple, it is obvious. When you quote a line from a book to your friends at a party, noone asks you for royalties, although you are reproducing copyrighted information verbally. Do you see, it is all balancing an a razor edge!
Quote:
In this country (not sure about internationally, but it's likely to be the same), the most frequently broken law - by far - is copying copyrighted materials. Of course there aren't going to be policemen patrolling your home for copied stuff and throwing you in prison for it because it's so common. But I know some people who won't even listen to a burned CD because it's not "fair" to the person who originally made the songs.
I am one of the persons who would never play a pirated game. All my own are bought. Same goes to music I listen to. I have my morals.
Quote:
Let me give you an example. Look at the computer you're using right now. To create the hardware and software, to make factories creating these, to market it, the years and years of research and theory in the field of computers, the millions of man-hours spent creating these items, and the meticulous refinement of every aspect must be worth a lot. That's a no-brainer. Now, imagine you could copy this computer. You can have a completely identical computer - in fact, you can have as many as you want - for only a ten cents ($.10) each. Do you want another one? Sure you do. Go on, nobody will know. Now let's say the computer companies have put all these billions of dollars into creating these machines we have today, but they get no profit. Big deal, right? You already have all you want from them? Well, they'll be discouraged from continuing research, etc. because costs are high and income is in the basement. They go out of business. 10 years from now, think of all the great stuff we will have - but wait a sec, the companies all went out of business, right? We're stuck here. It's simply too dangerous for a company to risk itself and millions of dollars to create a computer, have it sell about a dozen times and then no more, because people are copying it endlessly. It's all about money. You can't expect the companies to exist without them making a profit somehow. The same thing exists for intellectual property - and the profit comes from your wallet.
Like i said, until they themselves dont state what is it they sell, they can't expect us to give up our rights based on lack of knowledge. Simpler put, if they say they sell information with a single person license and distribute it one a medium because its the only way to distribute it, then what we buy is information for a single person. Then we do what we want with it, except for selling it or giving to our friends. Is this what they sell ? If so, do I have the right to play the track from a CD at a party to my friends at my place ? or should they pay money, for me to let them listen the song I bought ? Can this get anymore ridiculous ?
Quote:
You have to get the creator's consent. If they say it's free, then you've committed no crime at all. But if they say their work is worth $100, even if you think this price is outrageous, it's a crime to own it for $99 or less. Because you've stolen money from the owner of the property.
Yes, i agree.
Quote:
As for my opinion - go for it, you can't stop the masses from copying this stuff. But morally it's wrong. As long as you keep this in mind, then whatever you do will fall on your own conscience alone. But if you get caught, you've never met me ;)
Yes, to an extent you can stop the masses. But dont go over bodies, because then you are fighting with the same gun you are being shot at with.
