Censorship is REAL and ADVANCING
- Thread starter s0denone
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Just to put things in perspective; my Grandma was an illegal Enid Blyton book dealer.
The most fearsome (and kind) illegal book seller known to man.
Or the only one.
The most fearsome (and kind) illegal book seller known to man.
Or the only one.
Sigh. While the fact of the matter is that piracy is illegal, and therefore the website's users should not be surprised or indignant at this maneuvere, I will summarise on Piracy:
1. Piracy is, as has been pointed out, a victimless crime, as the only victims have so much money that if it were turned into thousand dollar bills and piled in a heap then I'm pretty sure I could cover most of Siberia with it. It does not harm them in the traditional sense, what it does is offend their upper-middle class sense of propriety- ergo- they percieve a much greater harm. In reality, the harm is less significant to their financial wellbeing than a double whiskey is to their physical wellbeing.
2. The argument that somehow by pirating things we are going to destroy music, movie and gaming is absurd. For music, one must realise that music predates intellectual copyright by so great an expanse of time that the only conclusion is that by ignoring musical IP's we will stop the production of so many obscenely wealthy people. And let's be frank- wealthy people are, on the whole, worthless. They clog up the economy and their accumulation causes the whole damn thing to grind to a halt. Plus they make the place look bad, and drive up house prices.
3. Since the production costs of games and movies are greater, I would however argue that piracy does represent a legitimate threat to their industry. However, the best way for the suppliers of these products to revitalise their industry would be to make their products cheaper and better. Go onto a small-business mentality of producing high-quality, low-price products.
The issue here is that said industries have formed what is clearly a form of olgiopoly- they have, in essence, stopped competing. AND that is clearly a bad thing.
There's more, but I'm running out of artificail stimulus so I'm going to leave it at that.
Regards,
Fondant (Rt. Hon Lord)
1. Piracy is, as has been pointed out, a victimless crime, as the only victims have so much money that if it were turned into thousand dollar bills and piled in a heap then I'm pretty sure I could cover most of Siberia with it. It does not harm them in the traditional sense, what it does is offend their upper-middle class sense of propriety- ergo- they percieve a much greater harm. In reality, the harm is less significant to their financial wellbeing than a double whiskey is to their physical wellbeing.
2. The argument that somehow by pirating things we are going to destroy music, movie and gaming is absurd. For music, one must realise that music predates intellectual copyright by so great an expanse of time that the only conclusion is that by ignoring musical IP's we will stop the production of so many obscenely wealthy people. And let's be frank- wealthy people are, on the whole, worthless. They clog up the economy and their accumulation causes the whole damn thing to grind to a halt. Plus they make the place look bad, and drive up house prices.
3. Since the production costs of games and movies are greater, I would however argue that piracy does represent a legitimate threat to their industry. However, the best way for the suppliers of these products to revitalise their industry would be to make their products cheaper and better. Go onto a small-business mentality of producing high-quality, low-price products.
The issue here is that said industries have formed what is clearly a form of olgiopoly- they have, in essence, stopped competing. AND that is clearly a bad thing.
There's more, but I'm running out of artificail stimulus so I'm going to leave it at that.
Regards,
Fondant (Rt. Hon Lord)
The only flaw in your argument, and what producers of game, music and films are clinging onto is: "How can we know piracy will stop there?"Fondant said:
You can't be sure, that people will stop pirating because the products are cheaper and better. What you can be sure of, is the fact that there will always be idiots.
These idiots will eventually fuck over the whole as they are doing now; Why not argue that without these idiots, the companies wouldn't be able to get away with producing crap, and thus there would now not be any censorship?
Do you think that the Westboro Baptist Church should be allowed to do what they do? And also, governments tend to change hands from time to time, and legislation like this will probably contended at some point, eiher by the common people, or other legislators. We don't need to firebomb their church; that's a long stretch from banning something that was already illegal.MaxTheReaper said:
I would have a problem with banning alcohol or non-Christian symbols or video games, but those are already protected by legislation in most of the Western world. I just think it's paranoid to think that the Man is going to be oppressing us at every corner now. Denmark has a long ways to go before turning into the next Germany or Australia. I don't even think Germany has put bans on game piracy.
The idea is not to prevent piracy completely, which is rather like attempting to utterly prevent crime- stupid, expensive and incredibly detrimental to society, but to minimise it's effects by mean of an effective carrot rather than an indiscriminate, ineffectual stick.s0denone said:
Actually, on rethinking that I must conclude that the stick approach is not ineffectual. It imposes severe and effective limitations, just not on the bastards commiting the crime. Imposing a limit on the number of installs or forcing internet uploads is no form of block to an even remotely competent, professional pirate. All it does is say to people like me, honest consumers:"Well, we're losing money, but instead of altering out practices then we'll fuck with you, dear valued consumer."
Lets be frank- The suppliers create an artifical demand (in the form of advertising) and then get surpised when people exercise their demand by theft instead of legitimate purchase. Why be surpised? It's going to happen, no matter what you do. The only effective option is to try and reduce the number of people who are taking the latter, illegitimate option. This will save them money in both legal action and increased profits.
Censorship is wrong, period, no questions asked.
People who are too stupid to just avoid media they do not want to view shouldn't get to view media at all. How about that? Clearly these censorship nutjobs have no interest in learning or being open-minded, so how about letting people like me see all of their media uncensored and all the morons can just smash their PCs and televisions?
People who are too stupid to just avoid media they do not want to view shouldn't get to view media at all. How about that? Clearly these censorship nutjobs have no interest in learning or being open-minded, so how about letting people like me see all of their media uncensored and all the morons can just smash their PCs and televisions?
The internet is the last truly free almost anarchist state, I wouldn't change that for the world.
Censor games, films, and TV if you must but leave the internet alone.
Censor games, films, and TV if you must but leave the internet alone.
there was recently a law novel that would use censorship of books and media to "protect" children, which includes ban of certain books and controll over the newspapers. Fortunaly, it was denied by the president. I doubt it will stop them from doing it anyway.
I smell conspiracy
I smell conspiracy
Just visited the Pirate Bay. I'm sorry, but it is not a legal site. It's not like using Google to find a specific torrent site, then utilizing that site. It IS the torrent site. You can't really compare "banning a site that is involved in nothing but illegal activity" with "banning a site that can potentially be used for illegal activities, but is still legit."
Hate to tell you thebobmaster but Pirate Bay is a legal site in Sweden where it is located and likely also under danish law but because it links to torrents (and yes also stores some) it is blocked. Thereby also blocking for access to legal torrents (yes they do exist)
actually no you can't, there are several laws saying that circumventing copy protection is illegal. you are allowed to make a personal backup of your own copy but not download another copyDys said:
there's a ton of services out there that already provide this, sourceforge and steam are 2 examples
actually that legality is thru a loop hole in sweedish law, this is the ONLY reason why they are operating. if they weren't in Sweeden they'd have been arrested and shut down a long time ago
ok what indie developers use the piratebay for their distribution? i know of none of them as they'd like to get PAID for their work and not have ppl freely download it
this isn't censorship tho. this is stopping ppl from aiding in illegal activity
and you've only offered very flimsy and bad examples of things that are possible but not actually practiced. you said there are indie developers that release material via the piratebay or other torrent sites such as mininova
actually it is as there is something called intent, you are only going to find illegal stuff to download, therefore visiting it makes it illegal. just because you don't think it isn't doesn't make it any less soArcticflame said:
taking some basic law classes in high school are pretty handy and so is having lawyers and cops as friends, both of which i have/done
Yes, and proving intent is, unless you are as abjectly stupid as to compose a document on your computer saying, AND I FUCKING WELL QUOTE* " Well, today I intend to illegally download Game X, Movie Y and V and Music J on Site A, ho hum.", abjectly impossible.
*Paranoia is setting in.
*Paranoia is setting in.
I highly doubt it. Providing the opportunity to choose to act illegal, is not illegal in itself. If it were, you would have to ban life.cleverlymadeup said:
You know, there ARE developers who develop free software. Also, there are those who distribute clients, or programs that require registration. Why have a huge, expensive server, when you can have the entire world, as your server. P2P is by man described as the future in networking - hell, look at the "Folding at Home" initiative, which is very similar.cleverlymadeup said:
It's still censorship. When communism was considered illegal in the United States, were pro-communist articles and such not censored? Censorship can easily be directed towards what is illegal(even though, it is not, in this case with thepiratebay, just following your reasoning), and indeed almost always is.cleverlymadeup said:
And there is. You saying that there's not, doesn't make it any less true.cleverlymadeup said:
Plus intent is simply not illegal. If you intent to rob an conveninance store, but never do so, you have not committed an illegal act. You will not be punished by law.cleverlymadeup said:
If you intend to kill someone, well, you might receive punishment by law, but it won't nearly be the same as had you actually carried it through.
Well, it certainly is, but it doesn't legitimize your argument one bit. I have lawyers and cops as friends as well, and I present the opposite statement.cleverlymadeup said:
I'm not surprised, it's not only the companies that lose money due to piracy, the government and general economy lose as well.