Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 98

Thread: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

  1. #51
    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
    Your inability to simply run around and not present any real arguments is all I need. You and other attackers of copyright laws are nothing more than defenders of what in any other context would be considered thievery. Nothing more than little whiny simpletons who don't produce anything but want to get the work of others for free.
    So your sweeping generalizations and making stuff up that people didn't say, qualifies as a successful argument?
    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

  2. #52
    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 Harry Guerrilla View Post
    If IP were a physical product you'd be right but I really really don't feel like getting into semantics at the moment.
    Laws catching up with technology. IP is the work product of creative professionals. It is a product with value. Like a car or a television. It can be stolen.

    The facts are that IP length of ownership has been increasing to perposturous levels in the last 100 years.
    Be more specific. What changes do you have a problem with and why?

    Dead people shouldn't be able to own stuff and neither should corporations be able to retain monopolies for 90 years or more, by legal fiat no less.
    Why not?

    I don't like that Yoko controls the rights to Beatles music, but that was the creator's wish.

    It doesn't have to be this way.
    The written law enables law enforcement to act. And the law needs to consider changes in technology.

    Like I said earlier, there's really no way to stop bit torrents. But you can impede and discourage.

  3. #53
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,018

    Re: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    So your sweeping generalizations and making stuff up that people didn't say, qualifies as a successful argument?
    Quote Originally Posted by Travelsonic
    Ah, but copyright is not a "right to profit" - it is about control. You get control over a work for a limited time to do with it as you please, then it goes to the public. In of itself, being able to profit is not what copyright is about, nor was it meant to have the amount of control over other people's technologies, and works that it does now.
    Of course the fact that literal stealing doesn't factor into it is besides the point.
    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    The problem is not the song writer, the movie maker or software maker. They should get compensated and their wares should be able to be distributed world wide.

    The problem is, that the present laws are counter productive to you as a copyright "maker". Now with the Internet, you as a song writer can publish your songs online for free download or minimal payment. However if you went through one of the big music companies, chances are they not only will hike the price, but also limit access to certain markets and especially limit access online.

    It gets even worse for movies and tv shows. Tv production companies could earn a nice fee for selling or renting out their tv shows on the net to people outside the US.. but they dont.. copy write laws forbid it. So people are forced to steal the content because the copy write laws prevent timely distribution.

    My point is.. we live in a very connected world where the old time borders and language barriers have all but disappeared, but big business still live in the past and have for the last 20+ years refused to change and only done it kicking and screaming.
    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    Too true. Around here there are even a lot of so-called libertarians who support IP with the same enthusiasm.

    It is so refreshing to hear somebody else acknowledge copyrights and patents are a form of corporate welfare.
    C'mon Harry. We've had this conversation before. You're in clear support of being able to take **** from people simply because you don't feel like paying for it. To deceive yourself with semantics is an exercise in redundancy.
    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

  4. #54
    Professor
    Travelsonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,375

    Re: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Your inability to simply run around and not present any real arguments is all I need.
    Ironic, since you're the one creating things that weren't said, attacking people on arguments, points of view never presented.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    You and other attackers of copyright laws are nothing more than defenders of what in any other context would be considered thievery.
    [citation needed]

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Like I said earlier, there's really no way to stop bit torrents. But you can impede and discourage.
    Technically speaking, it would be better to impede certain uses of a technology than the technology all together - torrenting is just a medium for distributing data - like P2P, FTP, and HTTP.
    Last edited by Travelsonic; 03-20-11 at 04:28 PM.
    Nationalism in high dosages may be hazardous to your health. Please consult a psychiatrist before beginning a regular regimen, and if feelings of elitism and douchbaggery continue, discontinue immediately before you become unable to do so on your own.

  5. #55
    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 hazlnut View Post
    Laws catching up with technology. IP is the work product of creative professionals. It is a product with value. Like a car or a television. It can be stolen.
    The most closely related legal equivalent is infringement.

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    Be more specific. What changes do you have a problem with and why?
    Technology is changing faster, yet we keep extending length of ownership of copyright.
    Doesn't make any sense.
    To me, it's a form of corporate welfare.

    In every other aspect people will decry monopolies but suddenly with IP, it's acceptable.
    Why?

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    Why not?

    I don't like that Yoko controls the rights to Beatles music, but that was the creator's wish.
    Because it's not for the benefit of the creator, the explicit reason why extensions have been made.

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    The written law enables law enforcement to act. And the law needs to consider changes in technology.

    Like I said earlier, there's really no way to stop bit torrents. But you can impede and discourage.
    A lot like the war on drugs, counter productive.
    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

  6. #56
    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
    C'mon Harry. We've had this conversation before. You're in clear support of being able to take **** from people simply because you don't feel like paying for it. To deceive yourself with semantics is an exercise in redundancy.
    Me taking stuff without paying for it is a merely a punishment, the abusive relationship of IP holders and government.
    But I do pay for things related to IP.

    I like a TV show, that I pay for through my subscription to cable but because of my work hours, can not watch it when aired.
    It's not on hulu, nor is it available on demand.

    They left me no choice but to "infringe" on their copyright, to watch it.
    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

  7. #57
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,018

    Re: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

    Quote Originally Posted by Travelsonic View Post
    Ironic, since you're the one creating things that weren't said, attacking people on arguments, points of view never presented.
    Ah, but copyright is not a "right to profit" - it is about control. You get control over a work for a limited time to do with it as you please, then it goes to the public. In of itself, being able to profit is not what copyright is about, nor was it meant to have the amount of control over other people's technologies, and works that it does now.
    [citation needed]

    [citation needed]

    [oh, and reported your posts for your blatant baiting and flaming, arrogant twit.]
    Yawn, here, I'll ask you a simple question since you're obviously unable to defend yourself for being called out for what you are (that being a simpleton who doesn't produce anything) how many successful artists out there exist without the help of major record industries?
    Last edited by Hatuey; 03-20-11 at 04:35 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

  8. #58
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

    The very basis of this issue comes from technology making the previous notions of copyright obsolete. The theory was always about selling unofficial versions, like mass producing a book to sell it without compensating the author. Internet piracy does not do this. In filesharing, no money changes hands. It's not that there should not be rules to govern filesharing, but to force it into an economic model based on selling goods... it is inappropriate. Filesharing should be treated the same as physically handing a book to a friend.

    Copyright, as a concept, is becoming obsolete and only works if we impose an artificial scarcity on things that are not actually scarce. There is no physical scarcity to these items. Information wants to be free. Ideas function like a virus. It is futile and vain to try and stop this. Especially since it is only for the benefit of a few fatcats who takes all of the profits from these industries. Actual artists, musicians, actors, writers, and other creative people don't benefit from this scarcity. As always, businessmen whose only talent is shuffling money around reap all the rewards, and we bear the burden.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  9. #59
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,018

    Re: White House wants new copyright law crackdown

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Me taking stuff without paying for it is a merely a punishment, the abusive relationship of IP holders and government.
    But I do pay for things related to IP.

    I like a TV show, that I pay for through my subscription to cable but because of my work hours, can not watch it when aired.
    It's not on hulu, nor is it available on demand.

    They left me no choice but to "infringe" on their copyright, to watch it.
    Oh I get it. If it's not on when you want it to be on you couldn't wait for a rerun. You also haven't heard of DVRs. You just provided the perfect excuse for robbing liquor stores when they're not open. "Sorry officer, it wasn't open and I really wanted to get drunk. The store left me no choice but to break in and take it."
    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

  10. #60
    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=Harry Guerrilla;1059360789]The most closely related legal equivalent is infringement.



    Technology is changing faster, yet we keep extending length of ownership of copyright.
    Doesn't make any sense.
    Why not?

    Be more specific. Give me examples of specific copyrights being wrongfully extended.

    To me, it's a form of corporate welfare.
    I'll need specifics to agree or disagree if corps are getting something for free.

    In every other aspect people will decry monopolies but suddenly with IP, it's acceptable.
    Why?
    Which single company owns the monopoly on IP (intellectual property)?

    That's what a monopoly is, right?



    Because it's not for the benefit of the creator, the explicit reason why extensions have been made.
    Then all inheritance should be taxed at 100%. Once your husband dies, you lose your house, your bank accounts and anything of value that he provided.



    A lot like the war on drugs, counter productive.
    Sometimes. I would say not properly executed.

Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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