Music Piracy
MonopolyOnReason
intangible property such as music. In fact, derision is common when
those that refuse to steal the work of others are made known. In many
of these cases, debate about the finer points of the law or practical
matters such as digital rights management arise. Far less often does
the morality (or lack thereof) involved get discussed.
...
The idea is put forth that since piracy involves copying an intangible
product to new media, the original owner is left no worse off from the
theft, and that “the quality of the recording was terrible…no one
would download [the infringer's video] to avoid paying…music” and that
“there was no plausible” way that the copyright holder was being
harmed by the infringement. I suppose that no harm is done if I enter
and sleep in a stranger’s living room while he is on vacation, as long
as I don’t do any damage. Yet we don’t condone that behavior,
difficult as it is to prevent.
Read the rest of this » http://monopolyonreason.com/blog/?p=42
John J
> In recent times, it has become somewhat socially acceptable to steal
> intangible property such as music.
Keep it simple.
Music is TANGIBLE. It is as real as concrete. Theft is theft.
Sean
"John J" <no...@droffats.ten> wrote in message
news:gbCdndWHEPRIoGTV...@supernews.com...
This subject is a complicated one. Not least because of vested interests of
those with existing institutionalised power, namely Media Companies of
today.
One could argue that the music of The Beatles is as much firmly located
within the public domain as Mozart, and yet it is not illegal to copy and
sell Mozart music scores, or perform them in public for a fee without
recorse to any Copyright Holder.
In regard to the downloading of music and videos, there is a CLEAR and
SELF-EVIDENT difference between downloading *copies* of music for personal
use, and selling same on CD on the open market for a profit, the latter
being the REAL meaning of the word *Piracy*.
Can anyone define the difference between:
Me buying the latest single, copying it onto my computer, and then copying
it onto my daughters MP3 player for her enjoyment, and then her sharing that
with her friends down the street?
and
My daughter downloading a copy of that same music from her online friends,
putting it on her MP3 player and then sharing with it her friends who live
down the street?
and
In 1963, me listening to The Beatles on the radio, recording that music onto
my personal audio tape player, and then sharing that tape with my friends
down the street?
OR
Me in 2008 listening to The Beatles online, copying that music onto my
computer, and sharing it with my friends down the street?
-----------------------------------
VESTED interests seem to have no problem with labelling myself and my
daughter as Pirates and Criminals, and being guilty of theft.
I'd suggest that in REALITY, nothing has changed since 1960 -- the rest is
simply smoke and mirrors.
Copyright Law was NOT created to ensure an INCOME STREAM for creators
forever, but in fact to RESTRICT the Rights of those Creators to enable and
facilitate ongoing creativity and the sharing of that with the rest of
humanity.
The whole purpose has been Hijacked in the public arena, and it appears many
have been seduced by that.
I recommend a full reading of the History of Copyright Law which began in
the UK after the development of the Printing Press, and then have a damn
good look at Chapter 7, and learn the difference between the individuals
Legally enshrined Right to COPY, and the term PIRACY.
These things are mutually exclusive, and not the same thing at all.
At present sanity and reason do not rule the public arena of Copyright Law,
and vested interests have been eating away at Individual's rights to
Published materials progressively by duping the Public and Politicians in
all Nations using *digitisation* and the WWW as an excuse to achieve
rapcious and longterm Income Streams of over 70 years that they have never
had before in Modern History.
These immoral moves have also effectively created the Criminalisation of our
Children for doing what ALL children have done since the creation of the
Universe ...... that is SHARING really good stuff between themselves so they
all learn new things about Life, and get to enjoy life to it's maximum
potential.
THX
Sean
Immortalist
The Copyright Act of 1976 is a piece of United States copyright
legislation and remains the primary basis of copyright law in the
United States, as amended by several later enacted copyright
provisions. The Act spells out the basic rights of copyright holders,
codified the doctrine of "fair use," and for most new copyrights
adopted a unitary term based on the date of the author's death rather
than the prior scheme of fixed initial and renewal terms. It became
Public Law number 94-553 on October 19, 1976 and went into effect on
January 1, 1978.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Copyright_Act_of_1976
Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows
limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from
the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review. It provides
for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted
material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test.
The term "fair use" originated in the United States, but has been
added to Israeli and the UK law as well; a similar principle, fair
dealing, exists in some other common law jurisdictions. Civil law
jurisdictions have other limitations and exceptions to copyright.
Sean
"Immortalist" <reanima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b8a85eb4-dd1e-40c7...@31g2000prz.googlegroups.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Copyright_Act_of_1976
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
----------------
S: YES, exactly. The facts are different than the *beliefs* about them.
-------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Taping_is_Killing_Music
"Home Taping Is Killing Music" was the slogan of a 1980s anti-copyright
infringement campaign by the British Phonographic Industry (BPI), a British
music industry trade group. With the rise in cassette recorder popularity,
the BPI feared that people being able to record music from the radio onto
cassettes would cause a decline in record sales.
S: YES, exactly again. The issue is NOT Music .... the issue is SALES, and
anything that will increase profits with zero work or creativity.
Of course tape recording was around from the 60's and available to the
masses. IT never stopped anyone from making more and more music., nor stop
any growth in record/dc sales from then to now. And of course, todays
technology will not kill music either.
In fact it INCREASES it , helps creative people, and increases access to all
human beings who otherwise would not be exposed to good quality art. IOW
it's good for Humanity now, and over the long term. Media Companies that are
criminalising our children today are simply incompetant and no longer can
keep up with Humanity or technology. Their only interest is Profits, because
any view of the music recording history shows what contempt they had for
creative artists ... they were just a means to an end and that was MONEY and
CONTROL has always been the Media Executives and Contract makers only
interest - THEIR personal self-interest, never the Artists, and certainly
not the world of Music.
cheers sean
miha
Music, as well as other arts do not exist for profit, but for
cultivating human mind. therefore they should all be free for use to
anyone who wants to use it. copyright is an 20th century invention, and
i think it won't last long. offcourse, artist have to live from
something and therefor art will never be free, but least we can do is
not forbid copying.