Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Piracy


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
578 replies to this topic

#261
Delfosse

Delfosse

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 170 posts
  • Location:USSR

The Swiss, well nobody really cares about the Swiss. They seem to have made it their national goal to profit from other peoples misery anyway for more than century, so whatever they do is always a bit suspect.

Do you really want this can opened?

Switzerland maintained neutrality to protect their own from the horrors of war.

Australians on the other hand never really cared for peace, they are all descendants of convicts (murderers, rapists and thieves), descendants of the worst human rejects from UK that were sent to Australia. When they came, they started by massacring the native population by millions and deliberately infecting them with smallpox. Having done that, they never really decided to stop. They continued their barbaric practices till the early 20th century, covering up and having each other's backs when it came to killing Aborigines. A true Nazi team play.

But when it came to fighting the Nazi during WW2, Aussies decided to give peace a try. They lost 40 thousand people in their "war" against Nazism. Were they not really into fighting Nazy Germany who was exterminating entire races and raping another ones, selling Polish women into forced prostitution, massacring Polish men and killing entire populations through labor?

You had legal obligations as part of the Commonwealth, which Swiss didn't. Australia never cared for peace. Australia had a decent army. Switzerland couldn't fight, not only because it was never intended to fight anything as a country, but also because it was surrounded by Germany and Italy from day 1. Australia on the other hand had no excuse. What right do you have to say anything against neutral Swiss?

I am not saying all this because I want to offend the Aussies. I'm saying this because you're dropping racist remarks against a country that has much more merit than your own and to show you that this kind of talk can be used against any country. But when your own country did more wrong, you've just no right to talk about these things.

And unlike you, I actually don't call any country or people as "people with a national goal to profit from other's people misery", I wouldn't allow myself anything like that. This is racist pure and simple.

but the Swiss state has had some rather dubious practices for a long time. From protecting organised crime and the being the piggy bank of the Nazis

Again, I can do this with any country. And if you're gonna do it, I'm gonna do it as well.

Did you know that USA kept selling oil to the Nazi Germany up until 1943? To the Japanese up until 42, who were massacring the Chinese by millions? Did you know that the British sponsored Hitler at the beginning of his political career (your Queen sponsored Hitler, yeah). Did you know that Hitler had only one friend and that were the Anglo-Saxons? He surrounded them at Dunkirk, but instead of crushing them, he just let them evacuate, cause that's the kind of relationship he had with the Anglo-Saxons.
And while the Soviets were shedding their blood to stop the Nazism in Europe, Americans held Nazi parades.

Do you understand what I'm telling you?

Do you want to say anything to the Swiss readers right now?

Posted Image

Edited by Delfosse, 06 May 2012 - 11:04 AM.


#262
greylord

greylord

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1053 posts
Uhhh....errr..this conversation has taken a slightly different turn than I think I want to pursue....

Is this thread Godwin'd?

#263
Orogun01

Orogun01

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2904 posts
  • Location:somewhere over the rainbow

Uhhh....errr..this conversation has taken a slightly different turn than I think I want to pursue....

Is this thread Godwin'd?

IDK but now we all really hate the Swiss.

#264
LadyCrimson

LadyCrimson

    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 7551 posts
  • Location:Candyland
  • Gold Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
@Delfosse - er....yeah, ok. That seemed really unnecessary.


@213374U - Hm. I can understand that argument perhaps, but I don't agree with it. Even if it doesn't cost anything to copy, what it does do is decrease the potential value for something. Like if someone "steals" my photograph and plasters it all over the web, the value that I might have been able to sell it for may become less because now the image is so common/well known. I will agree that hard value/harm is/would be incredibly hard to define or even prove, since who knows if I would have ever made money off that one photo in the 1st place.....and that in terms of big publishers it often seems unfair/pointless (no one likes over-inflated monopoly like prices), but in order to protect the "little man" the laws also (I think) have to protect the "big man" as well, or it's unfair. Anyway, agree to disagree. But thank you for explaining it a bit more clearly for me. :)

Sigh. The real issue (imo) is that humanity has yet to find a good economic model that works on a consistent, long-term level for "everyone". Maybe one day we'll be like Star Trek and work just because we all find it fun & rewarding to do so. "You don't get paid?"--ST:8

Edited by LadyCrimson, 06 May 2012 - 12:00 PM.


#265
Morgoth

Morgoth

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 10099 posts
  • Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Sigh. The real issue (imo) is that humanity has yet to find a good economic model that works on a consistent, long-term level for "everyone".

There's no such a thing as consistent, long-term sustainability in economics. Everything changes, and with it, politicians have to adept. This is something they completely and utterly fail. They, and their cronies and masters, just want to uphold the status-quo, and that's exactly why we don't have nice things in this world.

Adapt, or be doomed to repeat history.
  • Humodour and Mamoulian War like this

#266
LadyCrimson

LadyCrimson

    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 7551 posts
  • Location:Candyland
  • Gold Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

There's no such a thing as consistent, long-term sustainability in economics. Everything changes, and with it, politicians have to adept. This is something they completely and utterly fail. They, and their cronies and masters, just want to uphold the status-quo, and that's exactly why we don't have nice things in this world.

Adapt, or be doomed to repeat history.

Now there's something I can generally agree with.
Not completely related to that, but I read an interesting article from Stephen King (the author) re: the rich, taxes, and how the rich give to charity. He made some good points/comments about the distribution of wealth, imo (and it wasn't for the rich).

Edited by LadyCrimson, 06 May 2012 - 12:20 PM.

  • Humodour likes this

#267
Zoraptor

Zoraptor

    (11) Wizard

  • Members
  • 1635 posts
  • Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Hm. I can understand that argument perhaps, but I don't agree with it. Even if it doesn't cost anything to copy, what it does do is decrease the potential value for something. Like if someone "steals" my photograph and plasters it all over the web, the value that I might have been able to sell it for may become less because now the image is so common/well known.

Does it though?

You've got free exposure, the photo is well known and you can still claim fees from anyone using it commercially- and even if that photo is lost to the great IP cloud in the sky you still have the publicity from it for any other photos you have taken, publicity you would have had to work hard to get for yourself. That is both the viral marketing model and the model a lot of up and coming music groups use- release stuff for free to get exposure and build up a following, at little effective cost relative to traditional methods. That may not be an ideal case for all situations, but neither is one where a cabal of large record companies decide what music should be produced in a vacuum and by themselves, which was effectively the case prior to the internet (and is still largely the case in gaming, for example).

#268
Humodour

Humodour

    Arch-Mage

  • Members.
  • 3563 posts


Sigh. The real issue (imo) is that humanity has yet to find a good economic model that works on a consistent, long-term level for "everyone".

There's no such a thing as consistent, long-term sustainability in economics. Everything changes, and with it, politicians have to adept. This is something they completely and utterly fail. They, and their cronies and masters, just want to uphold the status-quo, and that's exactly why we don't have nice things in this world.

Adapt, or be doomed to repeat history.


Ding ding, we have a winner!

#269
Orogun01

Orogun01

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2904 posts
  • Location:somewhere over the rainbow


Sigh. The real issue (imo) is that humanity has yet to find a good economic model that works on a consistent, long-term level for "everyone".

There's no such a thing as consistent, long-term sustainability in economics. Everything changes, and with it, politicians have to adept. This is something they completely and utterly fail. They, and their cronies and masters, just want to uphold the status-quo, and that's exactly why we don't have nice things in this world.

Adapt, or be doomed to repeat history.

Speak for yourself I have lots of nice things. :)
But then again i'm not in this world.

#270
Humodour

Humodour

    Arch-Mage

  • Members.
  • 3563 posts
Sooooooomewhere over the rainbow, skies are blue, and the dreams that you dare to dream really do come true.

#271
Orogun01

Orogun01

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2904 posts
  • Location:somewhere over the rainbow

Sooooooomewhere over the rainbow, skies are blue, and the dreams that you dare to dream really do come true.

Hey... they're tax free.

#272
Gorth

Gorth

    Global Moderator

  • Global Moderators
  • 9791 posts
  • Location:Germany

Because making a copy of such goods costs exactly zero and doesn't deprive anyone of anything directly - and to prove that there is indirect damage you need to prove that the freeloader would have paid for it otherwise.

I don't think anyone (in their right mind anyway) really think every unauthorized sale of somebody's work equals a lost sale. Equally, I don't think anybody believes it comes at no impact whatsoever to those deprived of their payment. The "loss" is a group of potential customers that gets tempted by free alternatives with no discernible consequences and says what the heck, everybody else does it. The size of that group is what is relevant when trying to estimate losses. So far nobody has come up with a way of doing that, which makes the Dutch report utterly ridiculous (not that I would trust the selective quoting being in anyway objectively done on a site with 'torrent' as part its name).

As for my "funny" question about your employer paying you are not, I was genuinely interested in gauging your response, even if the questions sounds facetious. Of course people wants to get paid for their work (duh), but that applies to those who make a living of offering services that can be converted and distributed through channels they weren't intended for too. If we for arguments sake agree (whether we agree or not) that not paying for a service isn't the right thing to do, what are the alternatives to the current model? Do like the Swiss government and just tell the entertainment industry to roll over and die then get "real" jobs?

@Delfosse: Not sure what you are trying to say really. Aussies are good swimmers, but Europe is a long way from here. Not sure they would have left home anyway as they were busy fighting and dieing against the Japanese who were amassing troops across the Torres Strait for invasion of Australia. Mind you, the total Aussie population at the time was smaller than the Belgian. Go rant at them instead for not putting up a better fight... Is it a ridiculous statement? It is.

#273
Delfosse

Delfosse

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 170 posts
  • Location:USSR

they were busy fighting and dieing against the Japanese who were amassing troops across the Torres Strait for invasion of Australia.Mind you

If the Japanese wanted to invade Australia, it would've been invaded the next day. Only they had no interest in invading it and this was known. They declared war on the US precisely because US threw an oil embargo at them. With the oil they were getting despite the embargo and with their reserves, they had only a few years before running out of it. So the idea was that they were gonna attack Siberia, because it's close and the Soviets are busy fighting on another front. Or they were gonna attack the US. This was known, too. The Enigma they were using to encode messages had been cracked for over 2 years. US ships were stationed near Australia to capture the transmissions and decode them. Those transmissions, even of highest importance, are now published. They talked about Australia once and dismissed the idea entirely. They kept preparing for a massive war effort against USSR or USA, never against Australia. US knew this, therefore Australian government knew this. Australian troops weren't busy.

the total Aussie population at the time was smaller than the Belgian. Go rant at them instead for not putting up a better fight... Is it a ridiculous statement? It is.


1) And I suppose Switzerland was a country of 100 millions? It had less than Australia and you started advancing some bull**** theories that they thrive on suffering and whatnot. Well in this case by your own logic, Australia must be throwing parties when they learn about somebody's suffering, correct?

2) Belgium is only 250 km across, it's not enough to defend against a blitzkrieg without perfectly functioning tanks (most engines weren't reliable at the time) and timing, which requires heavy training. Australia on the other hand wasn't anywhere near, so it could help and wasn't in danger as I have already explained, but while the Nazis advanced on Moscow for 2 years, Australia only looked at America with admiration, waiting for orders like an obedient pet.

@Delfosse: Not sure what you are trying to say really.

You're unable to understand, obviously. Some things aren't meant to be. Maybe register on a forum for teens, the communication shouldn't be as complicated there.

Edited by Delfosse, 06 May 2012 - 09:59 PM.


#274
Gorth

Gorth

    Global Moderator

  • Global Moderators
  • 9791 posts
  • Location:Germany

You're unable to understand, obviously. Some things aren't meant to be. Maybe register on a forum for teens, the communication shouldn't be as complicated there.

Since this seems to be your level of debate, I can only conclude you have no interest in being serious, ranting and raging against the injustice of the universe being the extent of your attention span.

#275
Amentep

Amentep

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3381 posts
  • Location:Fawcett City
  • Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer



Because you think I'm gonna try to convince an impregnable arrogant insulting fool that he's wrong? Are you serious? No, I'm gonna take offense in your gibberish, tell you who you are and be on my way to do actual interesting things instead of talking to a spastic. If you want to become someone better, drop everything you're doing right now, lock your doors, shut your phone and start reading philosophy/history/politics books for a year. I know you're not gonna do this, so even writing this was a waste of my time. By the way, soviet national is an oxymoron.


Rofl...I didnt even know you were trying to convince me of anything. See, your problem is that youre a weak minded fool who can only debate by being overly aggressive and trying to redirect to random points in history. Im not the only one youve taken this stance with so this isnt some one-off cause "you so angy". Rant on but you just look like a tool.

Im really surprise by the attitude of some of you whos opinions I respect take property rights. Its "not really stealing"? What? Whether its the stone tablets of yesteryear, the books / 1 & 0's of today, or the pulses of light tomorrow, property rights dont cease to exist because the medium of distribution changes. Also, you dont deserve something beacause you are a special unique snowflake.


Here's an easier take then the Bioware example I gave earlier on why MOST Americans (NOT Russians, not Indians....AMERICANS) have committed Piracy.

This is why you may say there is a difference between actually STEALING something and Piracy.

Piracy is taking the ideas of something that you didn't come up with and using them...in it's most basic form. AKA...piracy deals more with taking an idea or service rather than stealing a physical object.

So you can pirate software, you can pirate music, you can pirate movies (saying you didn't steal physical items of these).

So where is my example?

There's a popular song sung in the US and Canada on people's birthdays. It's basically the Happy Birthday song. I won't repeat it here or write it down, but the instant I said it, you probably recognize it. Have you ever sung that song?

Congratulations...you pirated it.

That's right...that song is still under copyright and unless you paid the studio for it's use...you pirated.


Actually its not a certainty that that the copyright would hold up; it was copywritten in 1935 but for one note, a note split to accomodate the two syllables in "Happy", the song is exactly the same as the public domain song GOOD MORNING TO ALL, written in the 1890s; also there's evidence that other people the songs author used the tune with the words "Happy Birthday to You" prior to the copyrighting of the song.

I think the issue is no one wants to challenge the rights in court with a risk of loss. 4 more years and the EU can sing it royalty free, though, IIRC.

Edited by Amentep, 07 May 2012 - 05:31 AM.


#276
Mamoulian War

Mamoulian War

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2095 posts
  • Location:Slovakia
  • PSN Portable ID:mamoulianfh
  • Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
I hope after reading your own post, you notice how it is ridiculous, that a song from 1935, which might not be an original song after all, is still protected by copyright... But I would not be surprised that some asshat lobbyist will try to for some or another reason to force another extension of copyright and we will not see this song in public domain before 2150...

#277
Amentep

Amentep

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3381 posts
  • Location:Fawcett City
  • Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

I hope after reading your own post, you notice how it is ridiculous, that a song from 1935, which might not be an original song after all, is still protected by copyright... But I would not be surprised that some asshat lobbyist will try to for some or another reason to force another extension of copyright and we will not see this song in public domain before 2150...


I didn't say it wasn't ridiculous, I also mentioned that several legal analysts have indicated that they don't think that it'd stand up in court but there hasn't been a challenge mounted.

It wouldn't be the first time that a company claimed a copyright they didn't have and dared anyone to challenge them on it.

I also think the copyright extensions need to end. Active trademark should be sufficient to keep people from interfering with a companies ability to create and sell works on things that they owned that have moved into the public domain if it comes to that.

#278
greylord

greylord

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1053 posts
I'm just saying, that song you mention IS COPYRIGHTED. Whether you want to justify your pirating of it or not I suppose depends on your stance on piracy. If you sang it without paying the rights, YOU ARE A PIRATE!!!

Period.

Justify it as you will.

The idea that it is similar to other items out there is a COMMON THREAD for MOST items that are copyrights. Stating that the computer gameTemple of Elemental Evil was based upon a module that was created by an author decades ago and hence it's copyrights for the computer game run out sooner is similar...and holds just as little water.

Currently the song in question generates at least 2 million dollars a year in HONEST people who pay the copyright.

Now before jumping down my throat, remember my actual stance towards publishers...HOWEVER...I think the song is a PERFECT example of how people will try to justify their own piracy...

but even more so...those who state they are against piracy or anti-piracy...WHEN FACED WITH THEIR OWN HYPOCRISY...will then try to make excuses of WHY THEY ARE NOT PIRATES BUT EVERYONE ELSE IS!!!

"piracy" as it currently stands is FAR easier to commit than most people realize these days due to many stupid laws slapped down. Many of these laws were put down by the same dirty corporations I've been on about...hence they are the true villains here...and probably the worst in copyright violations (as seen by myriads of lawsuits tossed around in hollywood and entertainment circles on copyright infringment on their parts...but they have massive teams of lawyers that fight over these things for years).

Does anyone think it's any wierd item that movies come out with similar themes so closely to each other (remember the volcano and disaster years with Dante's Peak, or volcano or Armageddon and Deep Impact...that was perhaps one of the most flagrant times of studios ripping each other off).

I'm not against the piracy in many cases because the laws are so ridiculous and in some instance almost criminal in how they go counter to the original laws.

I say, take out all the ridiculous stuff put in by the corporations (who typically aren't even the copyright holders...just those issued the right to USE the item under copyright) and the stuff influenced by them and start standing up for the citizens of the nations.

However...for those who are anti-piracy...I'd say 90% are hypocrites and half the time they don't even realize it.

The song we discussed isn't the ONLY item commonly used by people which is copyrighted. There actually is a whole slew of them and unless you stay up and up on what is currently copyrighted and what is not, it's very possible that you, yourself, have pirated something..

so go pay your money correctly, or go turn yourself into the authorities if you are so anti-piracy that you support some of the absolute crazy claims of corporations these days that they are making (such as how they lose millions to piracy, when a LOT of that piracy occurs in places they don't even sell their games at!!!).


PS: What I stated about the corporations is really at the heart of the matter. This is the reason why the copyright for Happy Birthday is enforced and still garners royalties. Entertainment biz is happy to fight each other...but when you get to the smaller businesses and groups, the citizens of which laws are really supposed to protect...it isn't there.

So the big corps make these laws (or more like, pay off and support politicians who will make these laws with the money the corps support those politicians with) , and then hide behnd them while accusing the citizens of breaking them and enforcing their payments (almost like some sort of hustle idea...but with corps instead of gansters).

Basically, the corporations are basing their idea that there is NO ONE rich enough to challenge the ridiculous laws that they put in place, no matter how weak their positions are. This is why some of those EULA's which have absolutely ridiculous conditions in them for game installation haven't been seriously challenged in court, or why some of the other absolutely ridiculous items we deal with in games have't actually been challenged.

This comment from this site

http://volokh.com/au...robertbrauneis/

http://volokh.com/20...-the-copyright/

Ultimately, this is not just about one song. There are almost certainly other works out there generating significant licensing income in spite of serious copyright weaknesses. However, I donít see any easy fix.


about sums up my thoughts on the matter...including the song that we have discussed.

AKA...for my example for my positions...I absolutely think some of the things I do as a legit customer is absolutely horrid...however...until things change I will follow the rules and laws. It's not that I think they are necessarily correct or right, and think that in many instances are absolutely illegal themselves...but unless someone with the money and ability to challenge them comes forth...well..the law is the law.

I buy my items legit, and try to follow the law as it is, but that doesn't necessarily mean I agree that they are right or that as a legit customer I should be treated as I am.

Edited by greylord, 07 May 2012 - 09:06 AM.


#279
Amentep

Amentep

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3381 posts
  • Location:Fawcett City
  • Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

I'm just saying, that song you mention IS COPYRIGHTED. Whether you want to justify your pirating of it or not I suppose depends on your stance on piracy. If you sang it without paying the rights, YOU ARE A PIRATE!!!

Period.

Justify it as you will.


I'm not sure I agree with the classification of piracy (for it to be applied as how the term has been used in this thread you'd have to have downloaded, say, Marilyn Monroe singing it and not paying for the use in any way); I'd agree that the person has violated the copyright that exists (whether the copyright would stand up to a challenge or not) by creating a new version of the song sung by themselves without paying royalties.

The idea that it is similar to other items out there is a COMMON THREAD for MOST items that are copyrights. Stating that the computer gameTemple of Elemental Evil was based upon a module that was created by an author decades ago and hence it's copyrights for the computer game run out sooner is similar...and holds just as little water.


That wouldn't be the argument, since each "version" of the Temple of Elemental Evil are distinct works copyrightable on their own. The potential undermining of the "Happy Birthday" song comes from it being based on a song that the copyright owners of the Birthday song (or there successors) did not themselves have the rights to and whether or not that earlier song could have been under copyright (because you can copyright new derivative works of things in the public domain but not of copyrighted works).


Now before jumping down my throat


That wasn't the intent with my post; I thought you brought up an interesting situation that I wanted to comment on. Sorry you felt that I was "jumping down your throat" as that wasn't my intent.


"piracy" as it currently stands is FAR easier to commit than most people realize these days due to many stupid laws slapped down. Many of these laws were put down by the same dirty corporations I've been on about...hence they are the true villains here...and probably the worst in copyright violations (as seen by myriads of lawsuits tossed around in hollywood and entertainment circles on copyright infringment on their parts...but they have massive teams of lawyers that fight over these things for years).


Copyright violations are easy to do. Ever copy and forward a funny comic strip to a group of friends? Technically you've moved past "fair use" in republishing a work you don't own the rights to. Ever bought a sticker of Calvin (from "Calvin and Hobbes" peeing on something (like a car logo?). Then you're violating Bill Watterson's copyright (which he's never allowed to be licensed for Calvin and Hobbes ancillary items). Ever wrote fan fiction? Downloaded fan fiction to read? etc.

I'm not sure definition wise if I'd call all copyright violations piracy though (but this could be a semantics argument)

Does anyone think it's any wierd item that movies come out with similar themes so closely to each other (remember the volcano and disaster years with Dante's Peak, or volcano or Armageddon and Deep Impact...that was perhaps one of the most flagrant times of studios ripping each other off).


You can't copyright a generic idea. So there's no rights issue involved (although perhaps some creativity related ones).

I say, take out all the ridiculous stuff put in by the corporations (who typically aren't even the copyright holders...just those issued the right to USE the item under copyright) and the stuff influenced by them and start standing up for the citizens of the nations.


Not really the case for "work for hire" in which case the author is the company (this would include most movies, comic books and comic strips in the US at least).

#280
Humodour

Humodour

    Arch-Mage

  • Members.
  • 3563 posts

Australians on the other hand never really cared for peace, they are all descendants of convicts (murderers, rapists and thieves), descendants of the worst human rejects from UK that were sent to Australia. When they came, they started by massacring the native population by millions and deliberately infecting them with smallpox. Having done that, they never really decided to stop. They continued their barbaric practices till the early 20th century, covering up and having each other's backs when it came to killing Aborigines. A true Nazi team play.


Isn't Gorth from Denmark, anyway? Or was it Sweden. Attacking Australia (although you do raise some good points about the genocide the British committed against the aborigines) seems a rather ineffectual and childish strategy. Then again, the modern Australian is also rather ineffectual and childish (how anybody could in good conscious support that Tony Abbott faecal stain is beyond me), so there is a certain perverse symmetry at work.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users