quote Originally posted by jstricker: Maybe to some. The problem is we talk ourselves into thinking there IS no black or white, right or wrong, or anything else of moral certainty.

Abortion?

See what I mean?
YOUR idea of "black or white, right or wrong, or anything else of moral certainty" and MY idea may clash.
Who is "Black & White" right?

Yep, criminals believe they have done nothing wrong all the time.
"He was a worthless piece of sheet and deserved to die--I did the world a favor".

Anyone can rationalize anything if they try hard enough. Ask Hitler.

quote Originally posted by jstricker: You obviously aren't in the BUSINESS of creating intellectual property.

No, I am not.

quote You did take something. You took the money that was rightfully the owner of the intellectual property and kept it in your pocket instead of paying for what you are using.

So...what you're saying is that the owner is out money....money that I never would have paid in the first place. How is that exactly? If I would not have purchased a copy of the software, but I will use a free, pirated copy, explain to me what the owner is out.

I have to take some kids sledding (my old ass finds that harder & harder to do every year), but I do want to come back to this conversation, as I always find this debate very interesting.

Don't kill anyone untill I get back!

quote Originally posted by SGS: Robbing a bank or stealing a TV (because the homeowner is insured) is completely different than piracy, and that's why I'm bringing up the point. Money and TVs are physical concrete objects. If you steal my money or TV, I don't have them anymore. The "no one gets hurt" argument for robbing a bank is refuted by the fact that everyone gets hurt....to a very small degree when the FDIC makes the bank whole with your tax dollars.....or your homeowner's insurance premium goes up when your TV is stolen to pay the claim. That's the distinction I'm trying to make here. I can't make an infinite number of perfect copies of my TV.....but I can do that with music, movies, or software.

Not at zero cost you can't. It costs the producer of the item $ to make each copy they sell in a store.
If every single person who wanted a particular CD, item of software, movie etc, downloded it under less than legal means instead of purchasing it, did the companies lose anything?

Some people actually think rape shouldn't be a crime, since the woman still has--after the act-- everything she did before

And, FDIC does not get funded thru individual's tax dollars--it gets funded from banks.

If you can justify it, more power to you. I cannot.

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-10-2010).]

quote Originally posted by jstricker: BS Justification, IMHO. If you can't afford or don't want to pay for the product you have no right to have it. Period. I'd really like my wife to have a new CTS to drive to work, but I won't pay for it, so I should just be able to go take one? I think not. I also don't want to hear about any justification because it's not that much money.

Taking a car or other physical object from its owner, and copying bits of data are 2 different things ( yes, both are currently illegal, but its not fair to compare them, as they are illegal for different reasons )..

But that is a dead horse that we are all beating so ill step out at this point.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Not at zero cost you can't. It costs the producer of the item $ to make each copy they sell in a store. If every single person who wanted a particular CD, item of software, movie etc, downloded it under less than legal means instead of purchasing it, did the companies lose anything?

Absolutely they lost SOMETHING. But the companies want to play it off as if they lost the dollars associated with every single pirated download, and that's nowhere close to the truth.

quote Some people actually think rape shouldn't be a crime, since the woman still has--after the act-- everything she did before

Now you're going way into left field to make an analogy.

quote And, FDIC does not get funded thru individual's tax dollars--it gets funded from banks.

Sure, the premiums get funded from banks. But when there's a meltdown, like the S&L failures in the 80s, the taxpayers are on the hook for the tab.

And like I said, I justify a lot of it because the licensing agreements are impossible to follow. It's a catch 22.

quote Originally posted by SGS: Absolutely they lost SOMETHING. But the companies want to play it off as if they lost the dollars associated with every single pirated download, and that's nowhere close to the truth.

Steal little-steal big. It's still theft.

And, if the govt's step in on things like S&L cost us all in tax $, so does every pirated item. Lost local and state tax revenue on items pirated instead of being sold.

SGS, say you wrote a small book. Maybe a fanzine or perhaps a How To book on Fiero repairs, etc.
You go to the local flea market to sell them for $5 each. You're not trying to get rich, just make a little bit of money to reimburse you for the time you spent getting it all together.
The first day, someone buys your book, then they go and make 10,000 photocopies of it and set up a booth right next to you giving away the copies for free.

Are you happy with this arrangement? No one's been hurt. No one has been deprived of anything.
But good luck trying to sell something when people can get it for free.

You can see real life examples right here on the forum. How about when a forum member takes the time to design mounting brackets to do an engine swap. Then someone else takes those brakets, copies the design and sells them himself, but far less than your cost. Do you think this encourages or discourages the designer to come up with new products for Fieros? The kit car industry has this problem a lot.

quote Originally posted by SGS: Here's a scenario for you. When I buy a movie on a DVD (and I own many), the movie studio and the MPAA say I don't really OWN the information on the disc, I just own a license to view it. So, if my DVD gets stolen, I should be entitled to still view its content, because *I* own the license....not the person who stole the disc. So, does that mean I can download a copy of it from the web? The studio and MPAA say no. Will they give me another copy of the information, only charging me for the costs incurred in supplying me with new media? No. My only legal option is buy ANOTHER DVD. So which way do they want it? They want it both ways.

Would GM replace your stolen vehicle?

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Would GM replace your stolen vehicle?

No, but if you have the proper insurance, that YOU pay for, they will. If someone should break into said car and steals a CD, that you bought legit, would the insurance company replace it? They didn't for me.... I'm still screwed....

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Would GM replace your stolen vehicle?

It depends. Did I buy the VEHICLE, or did I buy a license to use the vehicle? If the dealership told me I didn't actually OWN the car, I was just buying the right to use it from time to time, then you tell me what GM should do.

quote Originally posted by SGS: It depends. Did I buy the VEHICLE, or did I buy a license to use the vehicle? If the dealership told me I didn't actually OWN the car, I was just buying the right to use it from time to time, then you tell me what GM should do.

you tell me--I already know. They would not replace it unless they were under legal obligation to do so--and they are not, unless it says so in a lease or rental agreement. And, it's moot anyway. You know as well as I do, that very very few people pirate IP because they lost the legally purchased original. A very very high % steal just because they don't want to buy it. Same reason all other thefts take place.
You're grasping at straws trying to justify it.

I'm not justifying anything. I have said repeatedly that it's not the right thing to do, I'm simply saying that you can NOT equate it with something like property theft.

quote Originally posted by SGS: I'm not justifying anything. I have said repeatedly that it's not the right thing to do, I'm simply saying that you can NOT equate it with something like property theft.

So it's just a little bit illegal?
How wrong is it? You say it's not as bad as stealing a TV. How about a Walkman? An iPod?

quote Originally posted by SGS: So...what you're saying is that the owner is out money....money that I never would have paid in the first place. How is that exactly? If I would not have purchased a copy of the software, but I will use a free, pirated copy, explain to me what the owner is out.

The protection and assurance that what he/she has worked hard for and created will be used by those that are willing to compensate them.

Let's say you're in the landscaping business. I would never pay someone $10,000 to landscape my yard, but if I can trick you into doing it for free, say by promising to pay you and then not, that's OK? Hey, I would NEVER pay you that amount, if you're stupid enough to think I might, then that's your problem, right?

John Stricker

It would then be my choice as to whether or not to pay for the service packs.

Right back at you, those illegal copies of software you have, have they been updated and patched? Who paid for the programmers and support staff to develop and release those updates? Not you, that's for sure.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by SGS: Another scenario for you... What if Microsoft started charging people for Service Packs to fix bugs in their software? Would you view that as legitimate, or would you view that as a scheme by Microsoft to bilk their customers out of more money?

quote Originally posted by Formula88: You need to educate yourself about the law. You proceed from a position of ignorance. http://www.copyright.gov/he...aq-general.html#what

And you need to learn how to read.

quote What is copyright? Copyright is a form of protection grounded in the U.S. Constitution and granted by law for original works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Copyright covers both published and unpublished works. What does copyright protect? Copyright, a form of intellectual property law, protects original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, such as poetry, novels, movies, songs, computer software, and architecture. Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section "What Works Are Protected." How is a copyright different from a patent or a trademark? Copyright protects original works of authorship, while a patent protects inventions or discoveries. Ideas and discoveries are not protected by the copyright law, although the way in which they are expressed may be. A trademark protects words, phrases, symbols, or designs identifying the source of the goods or services of one party and distinguishing them from those of others.

The bracket that you sold me, that I made copies of and sold cheaper is NOT protected by a copyright. It's protected by a patent, which you are NOT automatically granted, and for which WILL cost you a ton of money. If you don't patent your bracket, I AM free to make and sell as many copies of it as I want.

Even if you DO patent it, I can still make copies of it, as long as I don't sell them.

[This message has been edited by SGS (edited 01-10-2010).]

quote Originally posted by Boondawg: Abortion?

I rest my case. It can't be justified that the taking of an innocent life for convenience is "right". It isn't. It never will be. It never has been.

There are times when people have to decide which life to sacrifice in order to save another. If you can only get two out of three people out of a burning house. If you can only save qon of two from a sinking ship. If carrying a pregnancy to term could cause death to the mother. Those are not the same thing as electing to have an abortion because you didn't want to get pregnant but couldn't be responsible enough to say "no" when the fun stuff went down. There is no gray area there.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by jstricker: I rest my case. It can't be justified that the taking of an innocent life for convenience is "right". It isn't. It never will be. It never has been.

That is your opinion. The law...and MANY other people, disagree.

quote There are times when people have to decide which life to sacrifice in order to save another. If you can only get two out of three people out of a burning house. If you can only save qon of two from a sinking ship. If carrying a pregnancy to term could cause death to the mother. Those are not the same thing as electing to have an abortion because you didn't want to get pregnant but couldn't be responsible enough to say "no" when the fun stuff went down. There is no gray area there.

It all depends on your perspective. If you think saving the mother instead of the baby is the right thing to do if one or the other's life is on the line, I have some bad news for you. In the delivery room, if something goes wrong, the protocol is exactly the opposite. They will do everything they can to save the life of the baby at the expense of the mother.

That's right, I am.

I'll never hire you again. I may try to sue you to get some of my money back. I'll certainly tell all my friends and family never to hire you. I'lll never recommend you to landscape for anyone, ever. That's my recourse. No landscaper in their right mind will do the job and hope I'll pay because they know it will take forever to be paid in full while the customer nitpicks the job to death. Best course of action is pay as you go so both sides are kept honest.

That's not practical in the software, music, and movie industries. The product is finished. Done. Complete. When you buy it you're buying a finished product, not a work in progress. Because you're buying a finished product you pay for it all up front. That's the same if it's an OS or a washing machine.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by SGS: Let's say I AM in the landscaping business. You hire me for a $10,000 job, for which you pay me up front. Then I do a terrible job. That's the flip side. Based on your previous arguments, you have no recourse and are out $10k for a very poor landscaping job.

quote Originally posted by jstricker: If the do that, another company will come along and do it better. In fact, if the programmers are so inept, why aren't you doing it better, since you're so brilliant? Oh, I forgot, you're not a programmer. You don't sell anything you make with your mind. You just steal it and complain about it later. Sorry, your excuses are lame. You know perfectly well you're stealing it. Quite honestly, you're the type of person I hope the FBI reads this thread and comes kicking in your door tonight and confiscates you computer and all of it's stolen software, you don't deserve to have it. Is that harsh? Yes it is, I really don't care. You have denied a lot of people fair compensation for their hard work and you are using their intellectual property without their permission. That's not gray, that's wrong. John Stricker

See, you keep talking about me making excuses. The reason I bought piracy up in the first place was to illustrates how it was NOT black and white....how consumers don't always get the value they pay for, and will turn to "less than legal" means to avoid getting screwed by companies who are allowed to do it legally. I'm not making excuses for anything. I sleep just fine at night, thanks.

And I sell plenty of stuff that gets made with my mind...I just don't have a business model that allows people to easily take my work without paying for it.

Current polls show that only about 20% of the US population believe abortions should be legal in all circumstances. If we live in a democracy then it appears that the majority sides with me.

I don't recall saying that saving the mother was the right thing to do universally or even generally. Perhaps you could point that out to me where I made that claim. In fact, I said in those cases, it was a nearly impossible decision to make. You're just going to have to trust me on the fact that I've learned more about end of life decisions in the last three weeks than I ever wanted to know, and had to make them. There was a time in the last 10 days I went 5 days with only 9 hours of sleep agonizing over just this decision, which I made. In fact, we just had the funeral yesterday. This discussion is not a hypothetical with me.

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by SGS: It all depends on your perspective. If you think saving the mother instead of the baby is the right thing to do if one or the other's life is on the line, I have some bad news for you. In the delivery room, if something goes wrong, the protocol is exactly the opposite. They will do everything they can to save the life of the baby at the expense of the mother.

quote Originally posted by SGS: The bracket that you sold me, that I made copies of and sold cheaper is NOT protected by a copyright. It's protected by a patent, which you are NOT automatically granted, and for which WILL cost you a ton of money. If you don't patent your bracket, I AM free to make and sell as many copies of it as I want. Even if you DO patent it, I can still make copies of it, as long as I don't sell them.

Man, you're dancing around a lot to avoid facing the point.
That copyright explains why the book example I mentioned IS copyrighted. Music, books, etc. are copyrighted.

The bracket example is just to point out how - even if it's legal, that doesn't make it right. You don't answer the question about whether or not it encourages others to be innovative and bring new products to the Fiero community - knowing there's a good chance someone else will copy their design and sell it themselves.

And yes, you are making excuses. You're in more denial about what is right vs. what is legal than a man standing at the gallows with a noose around his neck talking about vacation plans for next summer.

[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 01-10-2010).]

quote Originally posted by SGS: But in our landscaping scenario, if we want to make it like software, music, or movies, you're not allowed to sue me....and all of the other landscapers do the same quality work as I do, so tell all the people you want. It won't make any difference.

Why can't I sue you? You're certainly free to sue microsoft, if you want. Or Adobe. Or whoever. There is no prohibition on that.

What you cannot do is steal their products and then strut around like you're doing nothing wrong. You are.

John Stricker

PS: It's always interesting to note that the majority of people that take your side of the argument are anonymous. Often no locations. No names. I wonder why that is? I sign every post. I have my town and state listed. I have nothing to hide from or be ashamed of. Apparently that's not always the case in these discussions.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: Man, you're dancing around a lot to avoid facing the point. That copyright explains why the book example I mentioned IS copyrighted. Music, books, etc. are copyrighted.

I agree with you there.

quote The bracket example is just to point out how - even if it's legal, that doesn't make it right. You don't answer the question about whether or not it encourages others to be innovative and bring new products to the Fiero community - knowing there's a good chance someone else will copy their design and sell it themselves.

Oh, so just because it's legal, that doesn't make it right....but according to other posters, it does. And sure, it stifles innovation for that sort of stuff to happen. No argument there. I have robbed the patent office more than once myself. Since patents are public domain, I can use those ideas for my own personal use, and I have.

What you're talking about basically boils down to having a smart business model. If your business model allows people to easily duplicate your work and sell things cheaper than you, then it's not a good one.

quote And yes, you are making excuses. You're in more denial about what is right vs. what is legal than a man standing at the gallows with a noose around his neck talking about vacation plans for next summer.

There are no excuses. I never said piracy was right or legal. In fact, I've said the opposite. I'm simply illustrating how "right" and "legal" are not black and white concepts.

quote Originally posted by SGS: I'm not justifying anything. I have said repeatedly that it's not the right thing to do, I'm simply saying that you can NOT equate it with something like property theft.

I can--I have I do, and more importantly, so has the United States Justcie dept and--AFAIK--every state in the US.
The fact that people become theives doesn't surprise me. The lengths they try to go to to justify and downplay that theft never ceases to.

quote Originally posted by jstricker: Why can't I sue you? You're certainly free to sue microsoft, if you want. Or Adobe. Or whoever. There is no prohibition on that.

Because Microsoft hasn't broken any laws. Sure, I can sue...but I don't have any legal basis to win under. Putting out a crappy, buggy operating system is NOT against any laws.

quote What you cannot do is steal their products and then strut around like you're doing nothing wrong. You are.

I didn't say that I did nothing wrong. In fact, multiple times, I have said that piracy was not right, but people don't seem to care about that. But instead of Microsoft screwing me out of money for a crappy product, I simply take their product and give them fair value for what I got out of it. Like I said, I paid $30 for Windows 7, and I think that's fair value for what I have gotten.

quote PS: It's always interesting to note that the majority of people that take your side of the argument are anonymous. Often no locations. No names. I wonder why that is? I sign every post. I have my town and state listed. I have nothing to hide from or be ashamed of. Apparently that's not always the case in these discussions.

Umm yeah, people do that because with a name and a location, and this being the information age, you can set yourself up for all sorts of stuff from anonymous weirdos that you don't know. I'm very tight lipped about the info I give out online, and it has nothing to do with the content in this thread. With a name and location, it's sometimes possible to find out EVERYTHING there is to know about you....including your birthdate, occupation, spouse's name and occupation, kids names and where they go to school, and your social security number.

I do find it interesting how polarizing a subject this is, something that couldn't even be dreamed of by the average person and totally beyond their comprehension 30 years ago.

Personally ill just follow Aleister Crowley's teachings: "Do what thou wilt" and follow my own moral compass