• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you think downloading movies or other content should be illegal?

Do you think downloading movies and other content should be illegal?

  • Yes

    Votes: 10 27.8%
  • No

    Votes: 19 52.8%
  • Not sure

    Votes: 2 5.6%
  • Other (explain)

    Votes: 5 13.9%

  • Total voters
    36

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The Pirate Bay Goes To Court

In May, 2006, Swedish police raided the offices of The Pirate Bay and seized the BitTorrent tracker’s servers. The site was down for a couple of days, but the bigger news was the arrest of some of people behind The Pirate Bay.

The Pirate Bay is not only the largest BitTorrent tracker in the world, it’s also the most notorious. There has been no effort to comply with copyright laws, with The Pirate Bay believing the sharing of files is legal and legitimate, despite the claims of the copyright holders

If they lose the case, the four people in the dock face damages of 1.2 million SEK (€112,000) to be paid to the Swedish Government, and a further 116 million SEK (€10.8 million) in damages to the movie industry members involved in the lawsuit. Prison sentences could also be handed out but it seems unlikely because, as always, the media old guard are more interested in money than anything else.

Aside from the obvious ramifications for The Pirate Bay and its founders should the case be lost, which, in my opinion, is almost guaranteed, there is possibility that the result of this case could be felt elsewhere.

The Pirate Bay is about to go on trial over file sharing and supposed copyright infringement.

Do you think downloading movies or other content should be illegal?

The Pirate Bay Goes To Court | What Are The Consequences If The BitTorrent Tracker Loses?
 
Last edited:
Though I partake in it from time to time, it's obviously illegal and should remain that way.

If it wasn't illegal, nobody who had the most basic level of technical knowledge would ever pay for anything again.
 
downloading movies or other content should be illegal >>> No
Offering a "free" downloadable movies should be illegal >>> yes

For me, I download movies, softwares, songs, .. as long as they are free.
 
I look at it this way. It's OK to record a physical copy of <insert movie/music here> and give that physical copy to another person as a gift. There are no laws against it. So why should downloading it from the net be illegal? As long as it is done without charging money for it then it's not a copyright infringement as far as I am concerned. Before the age of computers no one cared if you copied something so long as you didn't pass it off as your own work. A person could make a copy of Hamlet and pass it around and no one cared, again so long as they didn't pass it off as their own work.

I know the argument of "it takes money away from the original authors/actors etc etc but I just don't see it. This kind of thing has been happening for YEARS now and they are still in business making more money than I will ever see in my life time. So obviously it doesn't hurt them near as much as they claim.

Case in point that shows this even more is YouTube. There's millions of videos on there and you can even watch whole movies/shows on there. Yet that is considered OK. So whats the difference between YouTube and The Pirate Bay? You can watch the same video/movie/show free from both sites. Heck if you have the right programs you can put the video from YouTube onto your computer, just like you can with The Pirate Bay. And from there do what you want with it. So whats the real difference?
 
I look at it this way. It's OK to record a physical copy of <insert movie/music here> and give that physical copy to another person as a gift. There are no laws against it.

What makes you think this? That is in fact illegal and always has been.

So why should downloading it from the net be illegal? As long as it is done without charging money for it then it's not a copyright infringement as far as I am concerned.

That's just not the law.

Before the age of computers no one cared if you copied something so long as you didn't pass it off as your own work. A person could make a copy of Hamlet and pass it around and no one cared, again so long as they didn't pass it off as their own work.

Yes they did.

I know the argument of "it takes money away from the original authors/actors etc etc but I just don't see it. This kind of thing has been happening for YEARS now and they are still in business making more money than I will ever see in my life time. So obviously it doesn't hurt them near as much as they claim.

Because it was much more difficult to do it before, back when you had to physically transfer material to each other. Nowadays, one person can buy a CD and then put it on line for the rest of the world to download.

Look at the figures for online music sales and how they've come to dominate brick and mortar sales. If all of that income were to disappear, these artists wouldn't be making all that money.

Case in point that shows this even more is YouTube. There's millions of videos on there and you can even watch whole movies/shows on there. Yet that is considered OK. So whats the difference between YouTube and The Pirate Bay? You can watch the same video/movie/show free from both sites.

1) Plenty of things are pulled from Youtube at the request of the copyright holders. This doesn't happen at Pirate Bay.
2) People who put things up on youtube get shares of the advertising $$ in exchange for providing the material. This doesn't happen at Pirate Bay.
3) You can only watch streaming video on youtube. This isn't true for Pirate Bay.

Heck if you have the right programs you can put the video from YouTube onto your computer, just like you can with The Pirate Bay. And from there do what you want with it.

Which is illegal as well.

So whats the real difference?

One's legal, one's not.
 
Well as long as the music, tv and movie industries are pigheaded and stuck in the 20th century, then download away in my opinion. They are the masters of their own doom.

My reasoning is simple. All the 3 industries have failed to keep up with the movement of technology. Why should I have to wait weeks and months if not years to see the next episode of my favourite tv show or new movie? This fact contributes to a huge portion of the downloading, especially on the TV side.

This is because of "rights", an archaic method to exploit more money out of people world wide. The "rights" issue was best exemplified during the last world cup in football. In Europe the main Danish tv channel has an encrypted version of its channels for expats living abroad (at an insane premium btw). But when it came to the world cup matches, they had to block the channel because they did not have the "rights" to send to Spain, France and others.. to Danish citizens, and only Danish citizens can get the channel (need passport to get the card). Now, you probally think, so what.... well the problem with this, is that the BBC, Spanish TV, German TV and many others, sent all the matches in the clear (non encrypted) for everyone to see. You could even watch some matches online at FIFA.com. This is just one example in a web of stupidity by the TV and Movie producers/releaser world wide.

It use to be that a movie was first released in the US, then Asia and then months later in Europe. Now days, a lot of blockbusters are released on the same day in most major markets, to avoid the piracy. But still, studios refuse to do so, and then complain when you can get a pirated version online before the premiere in the US. On top of that, some studios complain despite releasing the movie in Asia and Russia first, the world capital of pirates. And of course they provide no methods of being able to download or view the movies online at all.......... which does not help the situation either. They want us to buy DVDs after all.

Another idiotic moronic system is the DVD region codes. Not only is it anti competitive and in principle anti free market, it is acutally working against the studios! In today's market, one of the first regions to get DVDs is Region 5..... that is Russia, the worlds biggest releaser of pirated movies in DVD quality. We can get online, a Region 5 DVD rip of any movie (almost) before it is released on DVD in the US! And the movie companies complain...For example, a DVD region 5 version of "The day the earth stood still" was just released on the web a few days ago... the US DVD is out April 7th. See the idiotic nature of the system?

Look at TV. Most major TV shows (non reality) are made in the US. But because of the way the system is for the most part, the release of new episodes happens in the US first, and if we are lucky we get it the same week over here in Europe, but mostly its weeks if not months and years after. We have no possibility to download or access new US shows legally, because of the rights issue, but the technology is there.. yet the US tv companies refuse to give access to non Americans to download legally the content. And then they complain we download and watch illegal copies.... If I could pay a few bucks to watch my favourite tv shows hours after it airs in the US or even at the same time, I would. But I cant.

Now to compound the idiotic ways of TV channels, we have the case of Stargate SG1. For years, yes years, the pattern was the first half of the season was released in the US, with the rest of the world following the same week or week after.. no biggie often. Now, the Sci Fi channel held an SG1 winter break from mid December every year, but guess what... the Canadian and UK channels did not. They kept sending the episodes, so the latter half of the season was often OVER before American's got it on their screens. Of course American's loved to download the last half of the season. Even a few years, the SG1 season was started months before in Canada so when it finaly was aired in the US and UK, the Canadian's was several episodes in, and of course they were all over the net.... and TV channels complain................

The same goes for BSG btw.. during season 1 and 2, the UK's Sky TV aired new episodes before the US for a brief period.

On the music side, the industry took almost a decade to figure out that people liked having the ability of downloading, and that the industries pricing was insane. Now the game is up, and they are far far too late out of the "starting blocks" to do anything about the illegal downloads. On top of that they are only now, years after they finally accepted downloads (legally), they are now figuring out that having DRM systems suck and are counter productive.

Is this all stealing? yes, but when you leave the freaking door unlocked and big sign saying "come take my stuff because my security system is broken" then frankly I have no sympathy what so ever.
 
Last edited:
Though I partake in it from time to time, it's obviously illegal and should remain that way.

If it wasn't illegal, nobody who had the most basic level of technical knowledge would ever pay for anything again.

In some sense it is at odds with the general common law idea of private property. Private property is about scarce items, these laws are about monopolies.

On the other hand I can see the practical benefit, certainly in th near-term. I'd advise keeping copyright and such but limiting them far more than they are now.
 
As long as the movie industry and the music industry provide such primitive ways themselves to distribute Music and Movies and so on, and prices which are just meant to rob consumers, then I see what the pirate bay is doing is fair.

If on the other hand there was an alternative to downloading music and movies illegally, in a relative cheap way, then it should be illegal.

But who wants to pay for a movie online when often it takes longer to download, it cost the same as the physical DVD, and its full of restrictions and ****, and difficult to get hold of in the first place.

In Music there is no good alternative to downloading, except CDs, and they suck big time, who wants to own a CD anyways? I buy CDs, rip them and just put them on my computer.. But why the **** should i be so stressful to get my Music in a decent format?
Isuck is the only big Music library online, and its stuffed with DRMs and restrictions and ****.. Who wants to have to use and Icock to play Music anyways?


So yes.. Pirate bay is doing the right thing actually. Fighting the bloodsucking Music and Movie industry, who thinks they can survive by providing things in a rathe rprimitive and old fashion way, and suck as much money from you as they can.
 
None of this whining about how "unfair" and "backwards" the movie industry is holds to the fact that people who pirate films are stealing from the people who own them and distributing them against the owners' will.

So yes, if you download, you're participating in a crime, and no amount of righteous self-justification will change that.
 
None of this whining about how "unfair" and "backwards" the movie industry is holds to the fact that people who pirate films are stealing from the people who own them and distributing them against the owners' will.

So yes, if you download, you're participating in a crime, and no amount of righteous self-justification will change that.

Who cares, when the model they use is outdated and backwards they deserve to be stolen from.

Thats like a bank who keeps its money outside on the street in a box, because it cannot afford a safe, or didnt think of it.. I blame the bank then not the people for taking that money.
 
I think downloading should be illegal, but as far as I know, at the current time, it is not.Only distributing it or making it available for others to download is.
 
None of this whining about how "unfair" and "backwards" the movie industry is holds to the fact that people who pirate films are stealing from the people who own them and distributing them against the owners' will.

So yes, if you download, you're participating in a crime, and no amount of righteous self-justification will change that.

No one is justifying anything. All we are saying is that the methods of distribution that the movie, tv and music industries are using are contributing to their own problem in a major way and hence it is a bit hard for anyone to have sympathy with them. If a fat man complains he has blocked attires and blames the donut producer, do you have sympathy for his claims?

Hence I have very little respect to an industry that does not evolve with the technology while whining that everyone is out to get them. I also have very little respect to the complaints when the industry mandated distribution "standards" or rather limitations are directly make the problem worse for them, and they do not have the brains to see so. Look at my example of the movie "The day the earth stood still". Releasing a DVD in a region that is known for its pirates months before releasing it in the US, is just.... stupid.

The 3 industries have refused to accept that the times are not in the 1990s any more and we have this thing called the Internet and it is a great way to distribute information of any kind, very fast and efficient and that especially the younger generation does not want to wait weeks, months or years for something when they know that the distribution system is there to give it to them near instantly. And the worst part, is that the industries are in the situation because of greed and stupidity.. look at the DVD region system.
 
Who cares, when the model they use is outdated and backwards they deserve to be stolen from.

Thats like a bank who keeps its money outside on the street in a box, because it cannot afford a safe, or didnt think of it.. I blame the bank then not the people for taking that money.
Do you also think it is OK to walk into a store and shoplift because they do not have someone in every asle to watch you?

Stealing music, movies, or software is no different than stealing anything else. If you do it you are a thief.
 
Many musicians now make most of their money from concert tours rather than from record sales. This is different than when concerts were promotional to sell records. We've all seen the rise in concert prices. And the popular bands are making huge amounts of profit from touring.
 
Many musicians now make most of their money from concert tours rather than from record sales. This is different than when concerts were promotional to sell records. We've all seen the rise in concert prices. And the popular bands are making huge amounts of profit from touring.

Musicians made most of their money from touring before downloading.

It's the record companies that are losing out here.
 
I download plenty of stuff, and I also buy plenty of stuff. If it weren't for me downloading what I do, I wouldn't BUY what I do. I watch a movie before I buy a movie. I watch a TV show before I buy a TV show. And if I miss a show, I'm sure as **** not going to wait for 2 years before it comes out on DVD. I download a game before I buy a game. I download new songs someone directs me to before I buy a CD of that band/musician.

So, if they stop me from downloading, they are most certainly going to lose money.
 
It should not be illegal, although I am realistic and realize that that will probably never happen. What could happen is that businesses can legalize the free distribution of their product while still making money off it (Hulu, for example, which is a product of NBC).

Of course, this is an interesting question because it is a rare case where technology has already surpassed the distribution conditions of capitalist society, thereby making capitalism basically obsolete (in this market, at least). So what we will see in the future are attempts to appropriate this technology and to control it as well. Appropriation in the form of Hulu as an example (and Netflix, as another); control in the form of bandwidth capping and limiting bandwidth technology in general (in the US, which is one of the slowest countries in the world in terms of DL/UL rates, this is supported by monopolization of cable companies).
 
#93 Music Piracy Stuff White People Like

White people have always been renowned for having ridiculously large music collections. So when file sharing gave white people a chance to acquire all the music they ever wanted, it felt as though it was an earned right and not a privilege.

When (not if) you see a white male with a full iPod, ask him if all of his music is legal. If he does not immediately launch into a diatribe about his right to pirate music, you might have to nudge him a bit by saying “do you think that’s right?” The response will be immediate and uniform.

He will likely rattle off statistics about how most musicians don’t make any money from albums, it all comes from touring and merchandise. So by attending shows, he is able to support the musicians while simultaneously striking a blow against multinational corporations. He will proceed to walk you through the process of how record labels are set up to reward the corporation and fundamentally rob the artist of their rights, royalties and creativity. Prepare to hear the name Steve Albini a lot.

Advanced white people will also talk about how their constant downloading of music makes them an expert who can properly recommend bands to friends and co-workers, thus increasing revenues and exposure. So in fact, their “illegal” activities are the new lifeblood of the industry.

When they have finished talking, you must choose your next words wisely. It is considered rude to point out the simple fact that they are still getting music for free. Instead you should say: “Wow, I never thought of it like that. You know a lot about the music industry. What bands are you listening to right now? Who is good?”

This sentence serves two functions: it helps to reassure the white person that they are your local “music expert,” something they prize. Also, it lets them feel as though they have convinced you that their activities are part of a greater social cause and not simple piracy.

If you bring up this issue with white person who says “nah bro, I don’t give a ****, Dave Matthews has enough money as it is.” You are likely dealing with wrong kind of white person.

In the even more rare situation where someone says “it’s all paid for, and it’s all transferred from vinyl.” You have found an expert level white person and must treat the situation carefully.

Because of the availability of music online, a very strict social hierarchy has been created within white culture whereby someone with a large MP3 collection is considered “normal,” a large CD collection is considered to be “better,” and a person with a large vinyl collection is recognized as “elite.”

These elite white people abhor the fact that music piracy has made their B-sides, live performances, and bootlegs available to the masses. Their entire life’s work has been stripped of its rarity in terms of both object and sound on the record. The best thing you can say to them is: “vinyl still sounds better.”

However, it is recommended that you do not let this conversation drag much longer. If you let them continue talking to you they are likely to spend hours talking to you about bands you’ve never heard of and providing you with a weekly mix CD of rarities that you do not want.
 
It should not be illegal, although I am realistic and realize that that will probably never happen. What could happen is that businesses can legalize the free distribution of their product while still making money off it (Hulu, for example, which is a product of NBC).

Of course, this is an interesting question because it is a rare case where technology has already surpassed the distribution conditions of capitalist society, thereby making capitalism basically obsolete (in this market, at least). So what we will see in the future are attempts to appropriate this technology and to control it as well. Appropriation in the form of Hulu as an example (and Netflix, as another); control in the form of bandwidth capping and limiting bandwidth technology in general (in the US, which is one of the slowest countries in the world in terms of DL/UL rates, this is supported by monopolization of cable companies).

Bandwidth limiting technology is not because of pirate downloading or online video content, but because of lack of investment in infrastructure by the major telecommunication companies. It is not a shocker that the countries that early on in the 1980s started to invest heavily in fiber optics technology are the ones that do not limit download amounts and have the highest bandwidths in the industrialized world, and those countries that did not, are starting to have download limitations and where bandwidth issues are common.
 
Last edited:
Bandwidth limiting technology is not because of pirate downloading or online video content, but because of lack of investment in infrastructure by the major telecommunication companies.

This is why I said it is supported by the monopolization of cable companies. Under monopolization development stagnates.

As for bandwidth capping, this is due both to the technological limitations of the current infrastructure, but it will also be used in the near future as an anti-piracy mechanism. We are already starting to see the shift of the anti-piracy movement towards ISP's with the RIAA.
 
I'm too lazy to illegally download stuff.
 
This is why I said it is supported by the monopolization of cable companies. Under monopolization development stagnates.

As for bandwidth capping, this is due both to the technological limitations of the current infrastructure, but it will also be used in the near future as an anti-piracy mechanism. We are already starting to see the shift of the anti-piracy movement towards ISP's with the RIAA.

Yes we are, because the ISPs see it as an easy way NOT to spend money on making their infrastructure better. It is called a cartel in other industries.. and a criminal conspiracy frankly. But no matter how you spin it, it is a lack of willingness and greed by the ISPs to hide behind laws so not to do their jobs.
 
Remember two things
The consumer pays for everything.
Stealing wrecks mankind.
Some do not even know the definition of stealing; much less right and wrong....
 
Many musicians now make most of their money from concert tours rather than from record sales. This is different than when concerts were promotional to sell records. We've all seen the rise in concert prices. And the popular bands are making huge amounts of profit from touring.

Metallica for example has sold some 100 million records, but I figure most of their income comes from their constantly sold out stadium tours they have done for the past decades. 50.000 people watching their concert must bring in a good amount of money.

100 concers a year in their best years with most of them being 25.000+++ attendences is sure a heck of a good way to make money. And at best Metallica toured for 5 straight years, sold out everywhere, mostly stadium performances, some special performances as big as 500.000 people(Mexico)..

So yeah, I agree with you, many artists make most of their money from tours. But then again you have a hell of a lot of smaller artists that I figure makes most of their money from CD and single sales.
 
This is why I said it is supported by the monopolization of cable companies. Under monopolization development stagnates.

As for bandwidth capping, this is due both to the technological limitations of the current infrastructure, but it will also be used in the near future as an anti-piracy mechanism. We are already starting to see the shift of the anti-piracy movement towards ISP's with the RIAA.

I think that ISPs HAVE to allow downloads of illegal content or else they loose most of their customers, this especially because there are not alternatives to illegal downloads.. Who the heck wants a 20mbit line just to surf their internet browser?
 
Back
Top Bottom