post #71 of 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by tout View Post

Some people just don't understand. This is about far more than some dudes linking to illegal files hosted all over the internet. It's people like you and me who have these files, not TPB. The torrent protocol allows people everywhere to share the files with anyone who wants it. As long as you have the file on your hard drive and are running a torrent client you can share it with people who want it. It's also used by millions worldwide to share their own personal files (which was the original use) faster than direct connections.
Google, Bing, etc. = TPB but nothing will ever happen to big US companies. Only small fries get pushed around and blamed for this intellectual property and digital act garbage. Make better products and charge less money for them and maybe people will buy.
Copyright laws have been totally destroyed. Anyone can just purchase the rights to some dead person's work and call it their own and continue to profit off it. The copyright should only apply to the original maker and family if they die. There used to be literally tons of stuff in the public domain but it is getting smaller by the year now. Any corporation can purchase 'rights' to someone's work from 30 years ago... like Disney does(watch that Youtube video)
Everyone talks about wanting the creators of the product to get paid but 9 times out of 10 it's not the creator making any money, it's big business. Business owns the rights and the makers get squat.
Musicians don't make anything of note from CD sales.They make their money by performing live.
Directors/actors/stage hands get paid for their time in contract while the movie is made. They make pennies on DVD sales.
So who are you really defending from pirates here? Massive corporations that rake in millions of dollars a year. Some fat cat in a suit who probably never made anything creative or worthwhile in his/her life. Just a pencil pushing, phone talking, Congress lobbying suit. I feel real bad for the person who has 3 summer homes, flying to meetings in their private jet and a bunch of illegal immigrants taking care of their house and land.
Spare me. The people you're trying to defend are the biggest bunch of crooks in the world.
(sorry, got a bit off topic but some of these posts really piss me off)

I hate the bolded argument above. That's not the case, and the overall quality of entertainment media hasn't changed over the past 30 years. There are just as many "good" and "bad" options as there were 30 years ago before the computer boom. Genres change, emerge, and go away, but nothing is "worse" quality than it was 30 years ago. The only thing that's changed is (a) what is popular from day-to-day and year-to-year, and (b) the fact that it's so easy and cheap to copy and distribute media with virtually no financial costs associated.

What I cant stand about the above argument is that it is always translated into "I think what's out there is junk, therefore I don't think I need to pay money to watch/listen/play it, so I'm just going to acquire it for free." No. If you think it's crap and you don't want to pay to use it, then you don't get to use it. Why do people feel entitled to have/use/play something for free simply because they don't feel it's worth the price asked for it? And moreover, if this media is so much "crap" as everyone claims, why do you want it in the first place?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the way the antiquated "recording studio" mentality functions, but people can either (a) seek out media (and pay for it) or (b) claim that it's not worth it, but doing both is so contradictory it's not even funny.

There are fundamental differences to how google, bing, etc. function vs. how TPB functioned. Just because they index and display specific search results doesn't make them even nearly alike. Do you think Google bases its traffic and customizes its searches based on the availability of "pirated" (I actually hate that term) materials? That's like saying there's no difference between a police officer who discharges their weapon and kills a violent criminal vs. a random crazy dude who shoots an innocent person simply because they both killed someone. The situation and circumstances entirely matter and make all the difference.

So someone doesn't agree with the industry--don't spend your money on the stuff, I get that--but it doesn't entitle you to have it for free either.

I would argue that if anything, the illusion of "mass piracy" of media works against whatever statement people think they're making by not buying the material. All they're doing is reinforcing the fact that the media IS valuable to consumers. If regular retail sales perpetuate and people are coincidentally also "pirating" the media, do you think that will do anything to make the company want to produce and sell materials at lower retail prices? No, because the act of acquiring the media without paying for it is sending the message back to them that their material IS desirable.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply