| Lord N said: 1) Did I say that any company was praising it for profits? Where did I ever make that point? Furthermore, where are you getting this 30 billion illegal downloads. I'm sorry, but there is no way to tell how many downloads are illegal because everything traded over P2P is not illegal. There is also media that is out of print/discontinued/not available as well as the fact that some people who download and don't buy never would have bought it anyway. The burden of proof is on the industry because they are making the positive assertion that P2P is crippling them, it's not on anyone else to prove that it isn't true. So far, they haven't done this. They've only provided gross speculation on dollar amounts that they've lost every year and the number of illegal downloads, which are two things that they can't possibly know or prove.. 2) Are you paying any attention? I think you damn well that I'm talking about Napster before it was legit. I never said that P2P had no effects whatsoever, now did I? I said that the effect is nowhere near what the industry claims. This is why I brought up Napster, not to compare it to the industry, but to show that P2P can't be having such a serious effect if record labels were seeing record highs when Napster was at the height of its popularity. 3) When the industry demonized people who enjoy listening to their music, they were indeed assaulting their own fanbase. You do realize that there are people out there who use P2P and buy the music, right? Demonizing their fanbase and conducting legal threats against children and elderly people did nothing more but tarnish their image in the eyes of the public. If their intention was to get people to buy their music, then they fucked up. 4) Then you're wrong. As has been stated time and time again, theft involves the taking away of physical property so that the owner no longer has it. If you keep arguing that it's theft, then you're either wilfully ignorant or just plain stupid. Neither one looks too good. 5) It's because someone in the industry finally provided a palatable way for people to get what they wanted. It has nothing to do with ethics. Had they focused on improving their product and business model from the outset instead of branding people as pirates and making legal threats, then they'd hve been a lot better off. |
1 + 2. Just send me $100. Honestly you have to make thousands of dollars each year. You won't miss it. Life will go on for you. You admit that they are losing money, it's unquantifiable, should they be forced to incur losses just because it's so easy to steal music.
3. People that buy music and do P2P are pirates. Still the defination. You seem to think that the industry calling them pirates is bad and they get what they deserve when individuals go full P2P versus a mix.
4. Your definition involved physical property. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft Actual definition only states property. Which intellectual rights are, and an intent to deprive the original owner (from the profits they would receive). But keep calling me names. You won't get any hits if you type "intellectual property theft" into a search engine. Nope. I'm the only "wilingful ignorant" person. At least you get it.
5. It's cool. You want to steal music because it's expensive and you can. Not a rationalization at all.
You seem to be bent on ruining the Music in lets take your stance to the extreme. Let's say you make the next Mickey Mouse. You wright a story and make pictures of all the characters etc. You pitch your idea to Disney. They love it. So they have an intern copy all of your artwork and story. They tell you that they don't want to pay you any money for it because you don't have any physical goods to sell. So they use your exact story, exact characters, and come out with a whole line of movies, toys, etc. They make millions. You make $0. Sound like a good life? They didn't steal anything right? Sign me up.
