Australian Politics Forum - Digg revolt and censorship.

zoso

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 512

Re: Digg revolt and censorship.
Reply #15 - May 4^th, 2007 at 1:58pm

I might add that organisations like ARIA and the MPAA know that copyright infringement is not theft. What they are trying to argue right now is that a copied CD or DVD is

theft of potential revenue

. This is an utterly ludicrous argument since you cannot make the claim that someone who has copied an item would have actually made the purchase in the first place. Even nasty old Phillip Ruddock was recently presented with this argument and told the industry to go jump.

The market is changing, smart capitalists (eg Steve Jobs, (Apple)) are recognising this and embracing the new market, Jobs recently declared openly that DRM (digital rights management, basically what we are discussing) is bad for the industry as a whole because it hurts consumers. Idiots who are too lazy to embrace any change are screaming and shouting and trying to take your rights away through draconian measures.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Online www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 47369 At my desk.	Re: Digg revolt and censorship. Reply #16 - May 4^th, 2007 at 2:02pm Zoso you kind of avoided my question about books. Not digitizing them would not protect against copying if it was legal to do so.
Back to top	I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT! IP Logged

zoso

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 512

Re: Digg revolt and censorship.
Reply #17 - May 4^th, 2007 at 2:14pm

Quote:

Zoso - you should have the guts to complete your statement ""Music and art should not be something that can be licensed to users " with the words "...but freely available to all". You don't make this obvious implication because it destroys the whole basis of your argument.

No, I don't make the implication because I do not believe in this at all. Slow down, take some breaths and try to grasp what I am saying...

They want to take away your right to make backup copies of products you legally purchased, so they can artificially inflate their revenue stream as said products deteriorate. Do you agree with this? Do you think for example you should have to buy a new car when the tyres wear out?

Back to top

IP Logged

zoso

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 512

Re: Digg revolt and censorship.
Reply #18 - May 4^th, 2007 at 2:17pm

freediver wrote on May 4^th, 2007 at 2:02pm:

Zoso you kind of avoided my question about books. Not digitizing them would not protect against copying if it was legal to do so.

I don't see people copying hard copies by hand very easily, nor do I see this as a threat to the artists income. I'm sorry I wasn't trying to dodge your question, I believe that was a legitimate answer?

Besides, under certain circumstances it is legal to copy books, educational institutions can copy portions of books, and copyright itself has a life of some 50 years only.

I don't agree with removing an authors right to earn revenue, but I don't agree with removing a persons right to copy items they have purchased, where applicable (eg, good luck copying the house Wink

).

Back to top

IP Logged

zoso Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 512	Re: Digg revolt and censorship. Reply #19 - May 4^th, 2007 at 2:19pm What I am getting at is there is a distinction between simply copying, and copying with intent to redistribute. If having the right to copy your own items leaves a back door open to piracy however, then so be it.
Back to top	IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Online www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 47369 At my desk.	Re: Digg revolt and censorship. Reply #20 - May 4^th, 2007 at 3:15pm I don't see people copying hard copies by hand very easily, nor do I see this as a threat to the artists income. It is difficult. It is not worth it because it is illegal. If it were legal they would do it. So your basic philosophy is to make the copying legal but to make it illegal to profit from the distribution?
Back to top	I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT! IP Logged

zoso

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 512

Re: Digg revolt and censorship.
Reply #21 - May 4^th, 2007 at 3:25pm

freediver wrote on May 4^th, 2007 at 3:15pm:

I don't see people copying hard copies by hand very easily, nor do I see this as a threat to the artists income.

It is difficult. It is not worth it because it is illegal. If it were legal they would do it.

I'm not sure that it would be worth it, not much money in books. Wink

Quote:

So your basic philosophy is to make the copying legal but to make it illegal to profit from the distribution?

Yes, but only as long as the copyright/patent lifespan. And when it comes to CDs and DVDs, Australian law already reflects this. Books I'm not so sure on, but I'd like to see them try to catch me if I did photocopy an entire book.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Online www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 47369 At my desk.	Re: Digg revolt and censorship. Reply #22 - May 4^th, 2007 at 3:34pm Are you joking about the money in books? If a competing publisher could copy the book and publish it, they would. Obviously this would not work as a 'cottage industry' the same way it does with discs.
Back to top	I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT! IP Logged

zoso

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 512

Re: Digg revolt and censorship.
Reply #23 - May 4^th, 2007 at 3:50pm

freediver wrote on May 4^th, 2007 at 3:34pm:

Are you joking about the money in books? If a competing publisher could copy the book and publish it, they would. Obviously this would not work as a 'cottage industry' the same way it does with discs.

Fair enough I guess...

So do you agree that this is a just approach to copying rights?

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Online www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 47369 At my desk.	Re: Digg revolt and censorship. Reply #24 - May 4^th, 2007 at 3:57pm I don't care whether you call it copyright or theft. Are you aware that when you copy something illegally it is referred to as copyright theft?
Back to top	I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT! IP Logged

zoso Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 512	Re: Digg revolt and censorship. Reply #25 - May 4^th, 2007 at 4:17pm freediver wrote on May 4^th, 2007 at 3:57pm: I don't care whether you call it copyright or theft. Are you aware that when you copy something illegally it is referred to as copyright theft? I believe it is referred to as copyright infringement. You can't steal someones copyright...
Back to top	IP Logged

zoso

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 512

Re: Digg revolt and censorship.
Reply #26 - May 4^th, 2007 at 4:21pm

freediver wrote on May 4^th, 2007 at 3:57pm:

I don't care whether you call it copyright or theft.

Are you aware that when you copy something illegally it is referred to as copyright theft?

You steal something, that thing is taken away from the owner.

You copy something, that thing remains in the hands of the owner. The only thing you are 'stealing' is potential revenue, and as you understand economics you should know that at 50c a blank disc, that puts the cost way down on the demand curve, meaning it is unlikely the person would have actually purchased the item at the retail price.

Why can you guys not see the distinction here?

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47369
At my desk.

Re: Digg revolt and censorship.
Reply #27 - May 4^th, 2007 at 4:32pm

The only thing you are 'stealing' is potential revenue, and as you understand economics you should know that at 50c a blank disc, that puts the cost way down on the demand curve, meaning it is unlikely the person would have actually purchased the item at the retail price.

I understand economics. If I can get the same thing for 50c I won't pay $20. If I can't get it for 50c I might pay $20..

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

zoso

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 512

Re: Digg revolt and censorship.
Reply #28 - May 4^th, 2007 at 4:59pm

freediver wrote on May 4^th, 2007 at 4:32pm:

I understand economics. If I can get the same thing for 50c I won't pay $20. If I can't get it for 50c I might pay $20..

I didn't say you don't understand it, I said since you do, I can safely explain it that way.

What I am talking about is called 'fair use', it means when you purchase an item such as a CD or DVD you are allowed to back it up. You know, when you buy a CD, if you want to play it on your mp3 player you have to copy it to your computer in order to convert it to mp3, then you have to copy the files from your computer to your mp3 player. You now have 3 copies of your CD. Same story for DVDs. This is fair use and is protected by Australian law. Unfortunately for the US this is not the case. Either way, when sense says that copying is tantamount to stealing he is at odds with Australian law.

Back to top

IP Logged

Sprintcyclist

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 39515
Gender: male

Re: Digg revolt and censorship.
Reply #29 - May 5^th, 2007 at 5:28pm

My understanding was it is legal to take one copy of software for personal use. ie, in case the original cd gets scratched.

Copying for commercial benefit is pirating. Really bad for the original artist/writer.

For a book, I vaguely recall it is ok to copy no more than 10% of the book, or one chapter.
references must be given.

Should always be mindful that the artist/author hopes to derives their livelihood from the book.cd/software.

Back to top

Modern Classic Right Wing

IP Logged