Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: White House and the RIAA

  1. #31
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,893

    Re: White House and the RIAA

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    so if I can hack into your bank account and take your money then I shouldn't be punished. Afterall the internet was developed to share.

    So if I steal your car then its OK because you should have done better to protect it?

    You are ignorant to intellectual property rights and laws. Educate yourself on IP laws and why they exist before giving an opinion on things which you know nothing about.
    Tell me, do you honestly think $175,000 per song is a just penalty for alleged IP right infringement?

    And just how is downloading a copy of an electronic file tantamount to hacking into a BANK ACCOUNT or stealing a tangible car?!?
    Last edited by Spartacus FPV; 03-25-09 at 09:02 PM.
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

  2. #32
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: White House and the RIAA

    Quote Originally Posted by Lachean View Post
    Tell me, do you honestly think $175,000 per song is a just penalty for alleged IP right infringement?
    Depends on the infringer. For most infringers, no. For those who facilitate the distribution of unknown thousands or more copies it is probably too little. The problem is that there is no feasible way to exactly determine the damage.

    And just how is downloading a copy of an electronic file tantamount to hacking into a BANK ACCOUNT or stealing a tangible car?!?
    What GottaHurt stated was that if its on the web then its free for anyone to have. So if someone posts music then its free for anyone. My counter to this absurd notion was to mention bank accounts and how they are accessible by the web thus defeating the ridiculous idea that if its on the web then unrestricted access is fair.

    The other comment made by GottaHurt was that if companys don't do enough to protect their belongings then its their problem. This absurd notion was countered by asking whether its ok to steal your car because you didn't protect it well enough from clever thieves.


    The analogies were piss poor, I'll admit that. But the notions of justice and fairplay espoused by GottaHurt are simply ignorant to the very real necessity of protecting the livlihood of inventors and artists which is solely dependent on their ability to protect their works. Furthermore the rights associated with IP provide an enormous incentive that drives creativity, invention, and proliferation.
    Last edited by scourge99; 03-25-09 at 11:09 PM.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  3. #33
    Sexual Deviant
    GottaHurt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    05-07-09 @ 04:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    2,899

    Re: White House and the RIAA

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    Depends on the infringer. For most infringers, no. For those who facilitate the distribution of unknown thousands or more copies it is probably too little. The problem is that there is no feasible way to exactly determine the damage.
    The problem is you trying to defend an issue in which you have no clue on how to calculate just compensation.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    What GottaHurt stated was that if its on the web then its free for anyone to have. So if someone posts music then its free for anyone.
    I've said no such thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    My counter to this absurd notion was to mention bank accounts and how they are accessible by the web thus defeating the ridiculous idea that if its on the web then unrestricted access is fair.
    The only absurd notion here is your lame ass analogy of comparing a private limited access bank account, to unrestricted internet file sharing.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    The other comment made by GottaHurt was that if companys don't do enough to protect their belongings then its their problem.
    It is, precisely why I made the correct analogy of why we lock our doors. You can't seem to grasp this concept. Companies spend millions of dollars encrypting content in order to prevent it from being stolen.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    This absurd notion was countered by asking whether its ok to steal your car because you didn't protect it well enough from clever thieves.
    Again, the only thing absurd here is your analogy.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    The analogies were piss poor, I'll admit that.
    Piss poor? ****ing Epic Fail.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    But the notions of justice and fairplay espoused by GottaHurt are simply ignorant
    What's ignorant is your understanding of the discussion at hand and your dismal attempts to rationalize your bizarre "analogies".

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    to the very real necessity of protecting the livlihood of inventors and artists which is solely dependent on their ability to protect their works. Furthermore the rights associated with IP provide an enormous incentive that drives creativity, invention, and proliferation.
    Ahh yes, you end with the grand finale of emotional appeal for the poor starving artists and their battle against the evil, pimply faced high school kid, who's doing nothing more than the starving artists did decades ago, when they simultaneously pushed the record and play buttons on their tape deck.
    Pain can be such a beautiful thing

  4. #34
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: White House and the RIAA

    Quote Originally Posted by GottaHurt View Post
    The problem is you trying to defend an issue in which you have no clue on how to calculate just compensation.
    I suppose you do? Care to enlighten us?

    Quote Originally Posted by GottaHurt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99
    What GottaHurt stated was that if its on the web then its free for anyone to have. So if someone posts music then its free for anyone.
    I've said no such thing.
    Quote Originally Posted by GottaHurt View Post
    First, the internet was developed to "share".

    ...

    If they want to protect their music or other forms of media, then encrypt/encode them so they can't be recorded or "shared".
    It sounds like that's EXACTLY what you said. That if the record companies can't protect their music then its OK for others to download it if it happens to make its way onto the web of "sharing".




    Quote Originally Posted by GottaHurt View Post
    The only absurd notion here is your lame ass analogy of comparing a private limited access bank account, to unrestricted internet file sharing.
    Whats absurd is that you demand that record companies take every conceivable precaution necessary, no matter the cost, to protect their product. And if they don't its just "too bad" for them because you don't believe the government should be complacent in helping solve such a difficult problem.

    And of course you have all the answers: "Just encrypt it". Because if it was that ****ing easy why would thousands of companies divert millions of dollars into developing solutions for this very problem that even TODAY is not solved?

    Quote Originally Posted by GottaHurt View Post
    It is, precisely why I made the correct analogy of why we lock our doors.
    I understand. But why are you against laws that allow you to sue people if you don't lock your door and they rob your house?

    Quote Originally Posted by GottaHurt View Post
    You can't seem to grasp this concept. Companies spend millions of dollars encrypting content in order to prevent it from being stolen.
    They've tried such things. They are broken faster than they can be replaced. One example: DeCSS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The only solutions left are more and more complex and cost more and more money to implement. Moreover its risky because if you make things too much of a pain in the ass people wont buy your product.

    Quote Originally Posted by GottaHurt View Post
    Ahh yes, you end with the grand finale of emotional appeal for the poor starving artists and their battle against the evil, pimply faced high school kid, who's doing nothing more than the starving artists did decades ago, when they simultaneously pushed the record and play buttons on their tape deck.
    Except in those days you couldn't record every song from the radio station in under 5 minutes like you can today with a click of a mouse. Don't be so dismissive of the astronomical increased capability of proliferation made possible by high speed internet and the data transfer protocols of this day and age. This once negligible loss has turned into a hemorrhage of lost revenue.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  5. #35
    Sexual Deviant
    GottaHurt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    05-07-09 @ 04:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    2,899

    Re: White House and the RIAA

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    I suppose you do? Care to enlighten us?
    Oh OK, Let me calculate just compensation for you to defend your position

    You take bizarre to another level with each and every new post.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    It sounds like that's EXACTLY what you said. That if the record companies can't protect their music then its OK for others to download it if it happens to make its way onto the web of "sharing".
    I've said nothing of the sort. You choose to interpret my words, then replace them with your own, to make your argument fit.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    Whats absurd is that you demand that record companies take every conceivable precaution necessary, no matter the cost, to protect their product.
    No, what's absurd here is your twisted notion that a company isn't responsible to take every precaution to protect their product.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    And if they don't its just "too bad" for them because you don't believe the government should be complacent in helping solve such a difficult problem.
    Again, you take liberty with my words.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    And of course you have all the answers: "Just encrypt it". Because if it was that ****ing easy why would thousands of companies divert millions of dollars into developing solutions for this very problem that even TODAY is not solved?
    I don't need all the answers, it's not my product, or my problem to solve.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    I understand. But why are you against laws that allow you to sue people if you don't lock your door and they rob your house?
    I've not once taken this position.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    They've tried such things. They are broken faster than they can be replaced. One example: DeCSS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Their failure to find a solution is not my problem.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    The only solutions left are more and more complex and cost more and more money to implement. Moreover its risky because if you make things too much of a pain in the ass people wont buy your product.
    Yet you can't show a decline in the number of artists trying to get their product to the masses.

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    Except in those days you couldn't record every song from the radio station in under 5 minutes like you can today with a click of a mouse. Don't be so dismissive of the astronomical increased capability of proliferation made possible by high speed internet and the data transfer protocols of this day and age. This once negligible loss has turned into a hemorrhage of lost revenue.
    Giving a friend an album to record to cassette is no different than handing them a cd to store on a hard drive or downloading an mp3 to an ipod.

    The rate at which you can share content has no bearing on the intent of the activity.
    Pain can be such a beautiful thing

  6. #36
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: White House and the RIAA

    Quote Originally Posted by GottaHurt View Post
    Oh OK, Let me calculate just compensation for you to defend your position
    You are the one who said I can't defend an issue because I can't determine just compensation. So when I ask you to determine it since you believe I am incapable you refuse. Hypocrisy? I think so.

    Was there some point you had or are you being dismissive?

    I've said nothing of the sort. You choose to interpret my words, then replace them with your own, to make your argument fit.
    well I'm sorry if I misunderstood your position but that's what I understood based on your wording.


    No, what's absurd here is your twisted notion that a company isn't responsible to take every precaution to protect their product.
    THAT, is exactly the problem here. There is no easy solution for the entertainment industry to protect their products. They have every right to sue those who violate their IP rights.

    Again, you take liberty with my words.
    then explain your position better so there can be no doubt.



    I don't need all the answers, it's not my product, or my problem to solve.
    who is asking you to solve anything? I'm merely explaining why they sue rather than implement this magic "solve-everything" encryption technology you think exists but doesn't.

    Their failure to find a solution is not my problem.
    this discussion isn't about you solving anything for them. Why in the world you would think that is beyond me. It is however about debating the inconsistancies and ignorance within your opinions on the matter.

    Yet you can't show a decline in the number of artists trying to get their product to the masses.
    Why would I need to show this? This is about the RIAA suing people for violating their IP rights and justly so. Not about artists getting their work exposed.

    Giving a friend an album to record to cassette is no different than handing them a cd to store on a hard drive or downloading an mp3 to an ipod.
    As long as its within the terms of Fair Use or is not a violation of copyright laws then yes such is fine.

    The rate at which you can share content has no bearing on the intent of the activity.
    Of course not. But it does create a compelling reason why the RIAA would want to take extra steps to deter people from illegal sharing.. Whether the choice to sue people is the optimal choice or not doesn't matter. Its their choice to make and its fully within their rights to do so.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •