a perfect image to describe movie piracy

[blu]

you can't understand how taking someone else's intellectual property; something they created, paid for and produced, with THEIR money... is stealing?

not in the usual sense. the producers aren't losing anything from it. I would never pay for it in a theater as stated before so they would never get money from me anyway. they aren't paying for the bandwith to download it since they don't host it etc. I am not taking anything from them directly and they are not losing any sales or money from my actions.

what is so hard to understand?

 

[blu]

I thin I know why Blu is confused. Understanding the concept of intellectual property requires intellect.

you have no idea how wrong you are

 

[namvet]

So, If i use software i have legally purchased to burn a copy of a rented DVD......?

You actually purchased software to burn a copy of a rented DVD???

its on the store shelves

 

[namvet]

So, If i use software i have legally purchased to burn a copy of a rented DVD......?

that's right. as long as you use for you and don't sell it

 

[uscitizen]

So, If i use software i have legally purchased to burn a copy of a rented DVD......?

You actually purchased software to burn a copy of a rented DVD???

its on the store shelves

so are guns, machettes, kitchen knives, duct tape, Chocolate bars, etc. And all can be used in illegal ways.

 

[namvet]

You actually purchased software to burn a copy of a rented DVD???

its on the store shelves

so are guns, machettes, kitchen knives, duct tape, Chocolate bars, etc. And all can be used in illegal ways.

wonder if i can get you in the tray and click "burn" ????

 

[Zoom-boing]

You actually purchased software to burn a copy of a rented DVD???

its on the store shelves

so are guns, machettes, kitchen knives, duct tape, Chocolate bars, etc. And all can be used in illegal ways.

But these things have other (legal) uses as well. Does the software?

How do you use chocolate illegally?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

You give it to your neighbor's dog

 

[Zoom-boing]

You give it to your neighbor's dog

 

[☭proletarian☭]

You give it to your neighbor's dog

What? I thought you liked chocolate?

Now sit... stay.... I'mma go get the peanut butter...




jk

 

[SFC Ollie]

its on the store shelves

so are guns, machettes, kitchen knives, duct tape, Chocolate bars, etc. And all can be used in illegal ways.

But these things have other (legal) uses as well. Does the software?

How do you use chocolate illegally?

Yes it was purchased to help organize home videos that I converted from VHS and 8mm to DVD. And not "those" home videos.

 

[Zoom-boing]

so are guns, machettes, kitchen knives, duct tape, Chocolate bars, etc. And all can be used in illegal ways.

But these things have other (legal) uses as well. Does the software?

How do you use chocolate illegally?

Yes it was purchased to help organize home videos that I converted from VHS and 8mm to DVD. And not "those" home videos.

Did it work? We took old home movies from when I was a kid (I guess they were 8 mm) to a place to have them do it as a 50th anniversary present for my mom and dad about 7 years ago. Didn't know they had software to do this (maybe they didn't then). Thanks!

 

[SFC Ollie]

But these things have other (legal) uses as well. Does the software?

How do you use chocolate illegally?

Yes it was purchased to help organize home videos that I converted from VHS and 8mm to DVD. And not "those" home videos.

Did it work? We took old home movies from when I was a kid (I guess they were 8 mm) to a place to have them do it as a 50th anniversary present for my mom and dad about 7 years ago. Didn't know they had software to do this (maybe they didn't then). Thanks!

One program to convert them and one to arrange them and put more than one segment onto a DVD, seems some of our old tapes were only 15 minutes or so. And others were very boring. (like when the camera was left on for the entire Thanksgiving dinner.) ((OOPS))

 

[Ringel05]

not in the usual sense. the producers aren't losing anything from it. I would never pay for it in a theater as stated before so they would never get money from me anyway. they aren't paying for the bandwith to download it since they don't host it etc. I am not taking anything from them directly and they are not losing any sales or money from my actions.

what is so hard to understand?

Once again you attempted rationalization is simply astounding in it's naivety.
I'll find a fence (maybe you know what that is), have him/her contract someone to steal all of your electronics. Then the fence will give me some of those items at my request, you aren't paying for me to set this up since you're not hosting it. and I'm not directly taking anything from you hence by your logic you're not losing any money from my actions.

 

[blu]

what is so hard to understand?

Once again you attempted rationalization is simply astounding in it's naivety.
I'll find a fence (maybe you know what that is), have him/her contract someone to steal all of your electronics. Then the fence will give me some of those items at my request, you aren't paying for me to set this up since you're not hosting it. and I'm not directly taking anything from you hence by your logic you're not losing any money from my actions.

nope. the fence would have taken something tangible from me that would have to be replaced at a cost. ripped movies/music don't cost anything or have to be replaced by their producers. also, the original distributor of ripped stuffed usually don't steal it, they normally buy it, rip their bought copy, and then share. your logic fails at all steps

 

[Ringel05]

what is so hard to understand?

Once again you attempted rationalization is simply astounding in it's naivety.
I'll find a fence (maybe you know what that is), have him/her contract someone to steal all of your electronics. Then the fence will give me some of those items at my request, you aren't paying for me to set this up since you're not hosting it. and I'm not directly taking anything from you hence by your logic you're not losing any money from my actions.

nope. the fence would have taken something tangible from me that would have to be replaced at a cost. ripped movies/music don't cost anything or have to be replaced by their producers. also, the original distributor of ripped stuffed usually don't steal it, they normally buy it, rip their bought copy, and then share. your logic fails at all steps

No it isn't because you are leaving the key person out of your equation, the creative owner who is tangibly benefiting with a percentage of all sales, in this case the artist(s). Whether it be a physical or intangible product makes no difference, what it does is make you nothing more than a thief.

 

[blu]

Once again you attempted rationalization is simply astounding in it's naivety.
I'll find a fence (maybe you know what that is), have him/her contract someone to steal all of your electronics. Then the fence will give me some of those items at my request, you aren't paying for me to set this up since you're not hosting it. and I'm not directly taking anything from you hence by your logic you're not losing any money from my actions.

nope. the fence would have taken something tangible from me that would have to be replaced at a cost. ripped movies/music don't cost anything or have to be replaced by their producers. also, the original distributor of ripped stuffed usually don't steal it, they normally buy it, rip their bought copy, and then share. your logic fails at all steps

No it isn't because you are leaving the key person out of your equation, the creative owner who is tangibly benefiting with a percentage of all sales, in this case the artist(s). Whether it be a physical or intangible product makes no difference, what it does is make you nothing more than a thief.

except that they are not losing money in the traditional sense since I am not impeding further sales since I am stealing nothing tangible

 

[Ringel05]

nope. the fence would have taken something tangible from me that would have to be replaced at a cost. ripped movies/music don't cost anything or have to be replaced by their producers. also, the original distributor of ripped stuffed usually don't steal it, they normally buy it, rip their bought copy, and then share. your logic fails at all steps

No it isn't because you are leaving the key person out of your equation, the creative owner who is tangibly benefiting with a percentage of all sales, in this case the artist(s). Whether it be a physical or intangible product makes no difference, what it does is make you nothing more than a thief.

except that they are not losing money in the traditional sense since I am not impeding further sales since I am stealing nothing tangible

You keep rationalizing with the word "tangible" in reference to the product and ignoring the ownership of the intangible, that is where the problem with your argument lies.

 

[jillian]

except that they are not losing money in the traditional sense since I am not impeding further sales since I am stealing nothing tangible

there is a reason it's called intellectual property as opposed to real property. it is protected nonetheless.

maybe this will help -- although it seems to me your unwillingness to understand this concept is intentional.

U.S. Copyright Office - Copyright Law of the United States

and in case it doesn't register for you:

Statutory damages are calculated per work infringed.[32] Statutory damages range from a few hundred dollars to hundreds of thousands:
Statutory damages range from $750 per work to $150,000 per work
In case of “innocent infringement”, the range is $200 to $150,000 per work. "Innocent" is a technical term. In particular, if the work carries a copyright notice, the infringer cannot claim innocence.[33]
In case of “willful infringement” (again, “willful” is a technical term), the range is $750 to $300,000 per work.
Damages in copyright cases can be very high. In Lowry’s Reports, Inc. v. Legg Mason Inc.,[34] a 2003 lawsuit between a publisher of stock analysis newsletters against a company that buys one copy of the newsletters and makes multiple copies for use in-house, the jury awarded damages - actual damages for some newsletters and statutory damages for other newsletters - totaling $20 million.
[edit]Attorney’s fees
Cost and attorney fees: Copyright Act §505 permits courts, in their discretion, to award costs against either party and to award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party.

United States copyright law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is that tangible enough for you yet?

 

[JWBooth]