Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910
Results 91 to 98 of 98

Thread: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

  1. #91
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,090

    Re: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    The actions of IP infringement show that people tend to believe that they are buying the shows and not just the channel.
    No. It doesn't show anything other than people who don't want to pay for access to the programing. Nice non-sequitur Harry. If the majority of people weren't home when their favorite show is on, you'd have a point. However, that's not the case. People don't just infringe on TV shows, they infringe on movies, books, music, software etc. The list of things people don't want to pay for is simply too big for your argument to make any sense.

    It's not your property though.You did not originally create all the work in developing your idea's, you most definitely borrowed from others. Talk about leech.
    Yes. It is. What are you even talking about? Not only have I shown your entire premise about paying for shows to be absolute bull**** now you're off on some random tangent about whether or not using somebody's 'ideas' is copyright infringement? Here Harry, I'll ask you, when you buy a book, are you paying for the person's use of the English language or are you paying for what is in the book?

    Price is based on Supply and Demand, for IP the supply is infinite, so it should be free right?


    It takes time and materials to make each physical item, not so much for IP.
    Ah, I guess musical instruments, musicians, record producers, and the thousands of hours that go into making a single record or film etc don't count as 'time and materials'.

    I won't be vexed as that is reality.
    You're simply reaffirming my point. You don't create anything and are one more simpleton trying to steal **** from others. So it's no skin off your back.

    The whole point of the limitations of IP was because IP creators did not do all the work in their creations, they borrow from others.You call piracy leeching, yet you "leech" work from others and claim credit for the whole idea.
    Rofl, that doesn't even make sense. Writers don't credit people for the paper they use. They don't credit people for the invention of pencils. What 'ideas' are musicians leeching off others? Seriously, do you know anything about the media industry? Or are you going to keep claiming you're paying for shows?
    Last edited by Hatuey; 03-20-11 at 08:39 PM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  2. #92
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    No. It doesn't show anything other than people who don't want to pay for access to the programing. Nice non-sequitur Harry. If the majority of people weren't home when their favorite show is on, you'd have a point. However, that's not the case. People don't just infringe on TV shows, they infringe on movies, books, music, software etc. The list of things people don't want to pay for is simply too big for your argument to make any sense.
    What's the difference though?
    I paid for the "service" and even though I missed it, the cable company got the money, which they then paid to the creators.

    Why shouldn't I be able to watch it through a download?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Yes. It is. What are you even talking about? Not only have I shown your entire premise about paying for shows to be absolute bull**** now you're off on some random tangent about whether or not using somebody's 'ideas' is copyright infringement? Here Harry, I'll ask you, when you buy a book, are you paying for the person's use of the English language or are you paying for what is in the book?
    No, you use the idea's of others to create your unique piece of IP, so your creation, is not entirely yours.
    You do not own it.

    You're paying for the writing style.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Ah, I guess musical instruments, musicians, record producers, and the thousands of hours that go into making a single record or film etc don't count as 'time and materials'.
    For that one instance, you don't have to reproduce any of that every time a song is made.
    Costs associated with creating that product + the amount of product/demand = almost 0.
    So we might as well call it free.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    You're simply reaffirming my point. You don't create anything and are one more simpleton trying to steal **** from others. So it's no skin off your back.


    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Rofl, that doesn't even make sense. Writers don't credit people for the paper they use. They don't credit people for the invention of pencils. What 'ideas' are musicians leeching off others? Seriously, do you know anything about the media industry? Or are you going to keep claiming you're paying for shows?
    It's pretty well documented that contemporary music "borrows" from past work, the same goes for movies, books, art and just about anything involved with IP.

    Your creations are not solely yours.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  3. #93
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,078

    Re: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    I was referring specifically to your OP. And the first posts from other fringe-right folks.

    You were trying to spin it into a free speech,
    Where exactly did I try to spin it into a free speech issue? And how does this prove your "you wouldn't care if it was someone else" ?

    anti-obama issue.
    If Bush was doing the same thing as Obama then it would be a anti-Bush issue. Not everybody only gives a **** when its only the other side doing it. I am against outsourcing, anti-2nd amendment laws, illegal immigration and many other things and I will speak out against those things regardless who is doing it. I did not ignore Bush and McCain when they tried to enact anti-illegal immigration laws nor did I try to give them a free pass.
    Last edited by jamesrage; 03-20-11 at 09:43 PM.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  4. #94
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Last Seen
    09-24-12 @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,963

    Re: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Where exactly did I try to spin it into a free speech issue? And how does this prove your "you wouldn't care if it was someone else" ?
    Because during the Bush years there were the same type of 'crackdowns', prosecutions, working with MPAA, RIAA... Yet you didn't care.



    If Bush was doing the same thing as Obama then it would be a anti-Bush issue. Not everybody only gives a **** when its only the other side doing it.
    Yes, that's all this thread was about for you -- the black guy in the White house. And the first couple of posters in the thread started in with the free speech b.s. as if that was relevant.

  5. #95
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,078

    Re: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    Because during the Bush years there were the same type of 'crackdowns', prosecutions, working with MPAA, RIAA... Yet you didn't care.
    Was Bush trying to make these types of things a felony and authorize wiretaps for copyright violations? When Bush, and McCain tried to pass amnesty for illegals I said they were trying to sell this country out and I am pretty sure many other conservatives said the same thing I did. So this disproves your idiotic notion that I only give a **** when its the other guy doing something bad.


    Yes, that's all this thread was about for you -- the black guy in the White house.
    Other than you, did anyone in this thread bring up Obama's race in this thread?
    Amazing how you libs seem to be the only bringing up Obama's race. I guess as the old saying goes "he who smelt it dealt it".

    Just in case you do not know what that old saying means.
    he who smelt it dealt it - Wiktionary
    # (colloquial, by extension) Used to suggest that a person calling attention to or complaining about a given problem may in fact be the source of the problem.


    And the first couple of posters in the thread started in with the free speech b.s. as if that was relevant.
    I did not bring up the issue of free speech. And posters bringing up the issue of speech is not evidence that anyone here is a racist, nor is it evidence that they only give a **** when only when the other side does something bad. You are pathetic for always trying to unnecessarily bring up race and accuse others of only giving a **** when the other side does something bad.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  6. #96
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,090

    Re: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    What's the difference though?
    It's the difference between saying you're paying to play golf and access to the court.You don't actually pay for the food at a restaurant. You pay for the service they provide. You don't pay for a hooker, you pay for her services. You don't pay for the individual shows of a channel, you pay for access to that channel. Seriously, is an adult at your home? I'd like to explain it in simpler terms but I can't really use crayons on this board.

    No, you use the idea's of others to create your unique piece of IP, so your creation, is not entirely yours.

    You do not own it.

    You're paying for the writing style.

    For that one instance, you don't have to reproduce any of that every time a song is made.
    Costs associated with creating that product + the amount of product/demand = almost 0.
    So we might as well call it free.



    It's pretty well documented that contemporary music "borrows" from past work, the same goes for movies, books, art and just about anything involved with IP. Your creations are not solely yours.
    The law, property rights, intellectual property laws etc all disagree with your ridiculous assertion that a person's unique creations are not theirs to sell as they wish. I'm sorry you can't understand the simple concept of property rights and are arguing a non-sequitur.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  7. #97
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    It's the difference between saying you're paying to play golf and access to the court.You don't actually pay for the food at a restaurant. You pay for the service they provide. You don't pay for a hooker, you pay for her services. You don't pay for the individual shows of a channel, you pay for access to that channel. Seriously, is an adult at your home? I'd like to explain it in simpler terms but I can't really use crayons on this board.
    I asked what the difference was, because I consumed the product one way or another and it got paid for.

    First sign of weakness is resorting to insults. Tisk, tisk.


    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    The law, property rights, intellectual property laws etc all disagree with your ridiculous assertion that a person's unique creations are not theirs to sell as they wish. I'm sorry you can't understand the simple concept of property rights and are arguing a non-sequitur.
    Except that isn't entirely true.

    The Constitutional provision about intellectual property is that it's held in commons and that the only reason they granted a limited monopoly was to encourage the creation of new ideas.

    Both Madison and Jefferson agreed with this and thus it was added into the Constitution as such.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  8. #98
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Except that isn't entirely true.

    The Constitutional provision about intellectual property is that it's held in commons and that the only reason they granted a limited monopoly was to encourage the creation of new ideas.

    Both Madison and Jefferson agreed with this and thus it was added into the Constitution as such.
    Exactly. Intellectual property is counter-Lockean in the extreme, and it's one of the glaring logical inconsistencies that remains at odds with the founders' conception of property rights.

    More importantly, in the modern world, the very concept of intellectual property is breaking down before our very eyes. The way of the future a free exchange of ideas, and entails the non-ownership of ideas. Regressive, conservatives types may want to put the skids on change and hold fast to obsolete IP regimes, but it is impossible to stop this change.

    The increasing interconnectedness of society will ultimately render IP completely archaic. Sorry Hatuey, but you can either fight the change or get with the times, but either way the times will catch up with you.

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910

Posting Permissions

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