[ANARCHY__]

go thru it step by step datz da best way.

(Original post by FinalMH)
We currently live in society that believes it is okay to download copyright materiel.

spelling.

I don't want to come across patronizing to people so let me put my argument forward. We live in a capitalism country meaning you pay for peoples(companies) work and they make a profit. If you do not like this then vote for communism government. It really is that simple. You see people grouping together over this issue trying to prevent it. If you design something you want to be paid for it. right?

don't need to make the leap all the way to the other end of political economic spectrum just because you disagree with an element of a system which is not even purely capitalist in the first place. wow ders irony 4 u huh? just because i design something and i want to be paid for it, doesn't mean i will. a lot of artists simply accept this fact and get paid by other means. advertising revenue. merchandise. concerts.

That doesn't warrant you to download it illegally, why don't you petition for it to be released at the same time?

because we want to download it illegally. thought this must've been pretty plain even to the plainest lol

It is this the sort of thing we should be teaching are children? Shouldn't we be teaching them to live in a fair society? What happen to buying things and getting that fuzzy feeling?

are, children. such an important factor of society. however i don't see OP/T's point of buying stuff and getting a 'fuzzy feeling'. wtf? i don't see what's so unfair about it. i am not stealing their song. i'm getting a copy. you can still try and sell the song if you want but if you like capitalism, then the rules are, if no one's playing your game, tough ****.

What you are doing is wrong because the life that has been built around you is based on rules passed by generations of your people. If you disagree with them then you need to ask your representative to put it forward.

lol. rules change as a result of people changing. representatives put these views forward when there's a groundswell of opinion. pretty clear to me that a lot of people either think music is overpriced or should be free. if i was drowning in a lake would i have to shout 'help, i'm drowning!' to get some assistance?

Why is it seen acceptable? Does the United Kingdom want to be a china in the making? You can't have it both ways.

lolwut

Sure there is loads of things we can do to prevent it, but do you want to regulator everything? Everyone complains about price of music, DVD, ebooks etc

hey, here's a tip. lower the price lol

So would you be in favour of restricting the amount a company could make in profit?

who says i'm restricting them? i'm just not helping them.

Discuss.

@Neggers - downloading copyright material is wrong you know it.

give you a pos to help u out.

[iisjman07]

This video supports my argument: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL9-esIM2CY.

Listen to the entire song.

[FinalMH]

(Original post by ANARCHY__)

hey, here's a tip. lower the price lol

who says i'm restricting them? i'm just not helping them.

give you a pos to help u out.

hahaha

I agree with lowering prices :/ eBooks are the prime example.

[Donald Duck]

1) No I'm not in favour of limiting profits
2) The difference is the cost model. These companies have a massive fixed cost at the start, and then a tiny marginal cost per additional item they sell. Techinically, they should sell until MC = MB. However they sell very significantly above that, in order to get their money back. This leads to a very uncompetitive landscape (as is the industry structure). I understand that a significant amount of people no longer pay for music/movies, but all that means is that there will be less investment in music. I don't think that we need more investment in music (and far from all music profits comes from selling songs to young people) and believe that before computers, the cost of buying music was significantly overpriced. I think that making films becomes cheaper and cheaper (due to computer modelling/editing) and again, am not too opposed to movie stars making less than the CEO of a large company.

[ANARCHY__]

(Original post by FinalMH)
hahaha

I agree with lowering prices :/ eBooks are the prime example.

well i can get the complete works of shakespeare for free. so i'd like to see the logic of allowing one of the greatest playwrights in human history go for nothing, whilst having to pay £7.99 for this s***.

don't think it's going to happen lol. i will stick to getting music/videos/whatever-the-f*** as i do now. illegally. lolololol

[JacobW]

I'm in favour of property rights and the rule of law. Only on the internet could these things be construed as restrictions of our liberty.

[PicardianSocialist]

(Original post by JacobW)
I'm in favour of property rights and the rule of law. Only on the internet could these things be construed as restrictions of our liberty.

I too am in favour of property rights and the rule of law, I just don't see how you can have property rights in ideas.

1. Property rights are a way of resolving conflict between individuals over scarce resources. Where there is on scarcity there is no need for property.
2. Ideas, once they are in existence, are not scarce.
3. Therefore, property rights in ideas are illegitimate.
   

[12win12]

still dont understand how this is anything related to communism...

personally i download anime as personal interest but then it really sucks if fan-sub websites are closed down thanks to the law. i mean one series can be over 100 episodes... so ill back ppl up for money since im broke, not everyone can afford, what can we do?

just to add some things ppl download may not even be available to purchase in their country, so i think its for your own convenience too :/

[A Mysterious Lord]

I don't understand why you got so much neg; yes we've probably all at some point downloaded something illegally - doesn't make it right though does it?

I do think you've missed the point though, it doesn't make you a communist, it makes you a thief.

[Warfare]

I don't want to be pay $300+ for programs such as adobe Photoshop/illustrator/ms office which comes out every year/alternate year, so im in favor of torrents.Not that i don't think that they are brilliant apps, but I just think they overcharge alot over the minimum profit margin. I didnt go through all the posts, so ill just say im in favor of torrents. Btw, i dont think thief applies to everyone everywhere, in canada, to some extent, p2p file sharing is legal.

[illusionz]

(Original post by A Mysterious Lord)
I don't understand why you got so much neg; yes we've probably all at some point downloaded something illegally - doesn't make it right though does it?

I do think you've missed the point though, it doesn't make you a communist, it makes you a thief.

My reasoning for downloading:

I don't have the money to buy films/music. If I couldn't download it for free I'd simply go without. I don't download a huge amount and could manage perfectly well without doing so. There are two possible scenarios here:
-I go without
-I download stuff

Neither scenario puts any money in the pockets of record companies/film studios because I have none to give. The 'crime' is victimless. There is no difference as far as they are concerned between the two. It is a completely different situation to stealing material goods as the shop/broker in question actually loses something material which they could have sold to someone else for profit.

A second point I am merely hypothesising about is that most music at the moment is commercial bullcrap. People are only in it for the money and are not interested in producing a good song. If you take money out of the industry then the only people in it will be the ones who genuinely love music and have the ability to produce something good.

[usamakhanlodhi]

Media companies charge prices way above marginal cost, earn massive profits, these executives lead luxury lifestyles trust me even if people illegally download they companies will still have enough money to splash at pointless events bonuses etc as there are still some people who buy from legal mean for the "fuzzy feeling" (really dont know what the fuzzy feeling is I get the same feeling if I download a movie online or buy a DVD sure the main feeling is actually experiencing the media
Only a tiny amount of profit goes towards development, just maybe if thier profits started falling they might try and cut costs,prices become more effieicient..

Also if we are to have all access interenet then there is always the possibility that people will watch things online. Most people will not pay hard earned money for something they can get 4 free online without any reprucussions. Only way to navigate problem put prices of media down or do some SOPA crap which will probably lead to mass revolts( we are too lazy in the western world to like u know go out for months like in libya our form of revolution will probably be something along the lines of the Anonymous hacking method)

Also prices are soo high of a lot of things like ebooks,music many people from poorer backgrounds can not afford to listin to as much music/watch movies etc as they want
SO WHY should the lower income class who have a lower life expectancy, more prone to live in bad housing conditions broken homes etc also not be able to have the simple pleasures of entertainment.. Banning illegal downloads will only create another form of SOCIAL INEQUALITY AND LEAD TO UNREST.

Really do not think thats communism. ALSO illegal downloads probably reduce mass consumerism and personal debt..
ALSO illegal downloads are not substantially hurting anyone and as for the children argument we can teach children about justice, fairness in all other examples . I just hope one day my hypothetical children will be clever enough to realise why its alright to illegally download

[CLS94]

As a matter of fact yes, I am a communist, but I still don't really think your comparison is fair. I think we need to give up trying to forceably prevent piracy; it's clear that is impossible. The issue is that with things like this, people can't see what the impact of the loss of income a company, and therefore the people working for it, is. We just see the millionaires at the top, often avoiding tax and throwing their cash around, and people don't see why they should pay for that now piracy is so simple and hard to stop that paying is effectivly voluntry and down to ethics. They have a point; when multinational companies are using the vast turnovers they make to pay these top exuctives obscene amounts, why should they think that the money they pay will trickle down and help the individual employees and those who actually put their own hard work into the product. At the end of the day, it is coming down to capitalism and it's incompatability with advances in technology.

[de_monies]

(Original post by Harpoon)
Just like to point out that your thread title makes no sense, how can you be communism?

If you read, someone pointed out that they are indeed communism

(Original post by tuo_corso)
I am, in fact, communism.

I however will use TPB, but I'm pro capitalism. A bit of a paradox, I suppose. Though for me, it's not a case of "they don't deserve the money" but because I don't view it as theft and because I can

[muddywaters51]

file sharing will never go away. You cannot uninvent file sharing and you can never stop it completely.

Instead of fighting it, bands and movie producers should be finding ways to profit off of it which is not too difficult.

[Anna150]

For my ethics module i wrote an essay about why file-sharing should be legal. I can't remember what i put but i got 82% so i must have made a compelling arguement.

(Original post by A Mysterious Lord)
I don't understand why you got so much neg; yes we've probably all at some point downloaded something illegally - doesn't make it right though does it?

I do think you've missed the point though, it doesn't make you a communist, it makes you a thief.

False. The legal definition of 'Theft' is to dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another with the intent to permenantly deprive the other party of it.

If you download a song, you've created a new copy of that song. The person you took it from still has their copy so they haven't been deprived of it. So under UK Law it's not theft.

[JacobW]

(Original post by PicardianSocialist)
I too am in favour of property rights and the rule of law, I just don't see how you can have property rights in ideas.

1. Property rights are a way of resolving conflict between individuals over scarce resources. Where there is on scarcity there is no need for property.
2. Ideas, once they are in existence, are not scarce.
3. Therefore, property rights in ideas are illegitimate.
   

I don't see that your second premise is true. 'Idea' is an ambiguos term, but if we talk about concepts, which I would define (whether you agree with my definition or not is a moot point) as the sets of necessary and sufficient conditions for the correct use of words, whilst they themselves may not be scarce, the understanding of and ability to use them most certainly is--at least until we have some mechanism that can instantly transmit information into everyone's mind simultaneously.

[Mr.Zen]

(Original post by Ex Death)
I strongly advocate the illegal downloading of all forms of media. Why? Because it gets rid of the money-hungry parasites that are the record labels, publishers and other corporate whores who have no interest in the form of media, only how much profit it earns. "But then the entire industry will turn to sh*t! How will the developers carry on producing media?" But think about it.... If all media industries go tits up, what you're left with are a bunch of grassroots developers who will carry on producing media because of the love rather than the money. This is almost always going to be better quality media because there is no profit-incentive nor the profit motive which almost always stifles the potential of any form of media. Almost all big budget Hollywood films are regurgitated, formulaic trash, 99% of mainstream music is utter sh*te etc. etc.

This. They get enough profits as it is, it is only due to their greed and ego that they want all illegal file sharing to be terminated entirely. Now, I love LOTR, and I love Peter Jackson, I've bought the dvds, then the extended box set, not to mention the games, and now they want me to pay £50 for extended edition blu ray? I'm sorry, but I'm not prepared to do that. Anyway, why pay when you can get it for free?

[JacobW]

(Original post by Mr.Zen)
This. They get enough profits as it is, it is only due to their greed and ego that they want all illegal file sharing to be terminated entirely. Now, I love LOTR, and I love Peter Jackson, I've bought the dvds, then the extended box set, not to mention the games, and now they want me to pay £50 for extended edition blu ray? I'm sorry, but I'm not prepared to do that. Anyway, why pay when you can get it for free?

We can apply that argument to just about anything. My corner shop makes enough profit as it is; I'm not prepared to pay £1.00 for a loaf of bread. Why should I when I can break in at night and get it for free?

That attitude will lead to chaos and anarchy. Theft is greedy; charging a market price for a valuable service is not.

[internetguru]

I am a strong believer in capitalism and less big government. This means I do not support the government enforcing laws just to help certain industries. If companies don't like people downloading their stuff for free then adapt to prevent it.