Obama administration: "Piracy is flat, unadulterated theft"

[KeyMaster45]

As for the topic at hand, piracy is far too complicated an issue to be dealt with in soundbites. That's my thoughts on the issue. As the article said, handing down ludicrous settlements that bankrupt people for more than they'd have to pay if they actually stole a physical copy (Which, incidentally, would cost the creators far more, as you're dealing with actual physical goods already paid for and demanding a return, not "Potential profits"), is inefficient and needlessly punitive. I'm all for dealing with piracy, but there has to be a coordinated effort made so that legitimate customers aren't hurt, and that people only have to pay based on the value of the goods pirated, not 6 figure sums. Otherwise, it'll take the internet with it.

I think the RIAA and other organizations like it have somewhat backed off suing the pants off of all but the most agregeious of offenders. If they haven't already they need to be focusing their efforts, like you said, on attacking the source (IE the numerous sites that host and list torrents). I don't necessarily mean shutting them down either, that's something I feel could be avoided and eventually just hurts everyone. You know the old addage of "If you can't beat em join em" if the various industries were really as concerned about piracy as they say they are they would be focusing their efforts on making the enemy their friend.

Frankly I think the film and television industry has made the best strides in this by working with companies like Netflix and Hulu. They saw the want for easy on demand access to their product and seized the money making opportunty. The music and game industry also get a certain moniker of credit here as well due to iTunes and digital delivery platforms such as Steam.

They're catching on, alebit very slowly.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

The problem here, as always is that this isn't a strictly black and white issue.

Let us pretend for a moment that I want to own a copy of "Red Dead Redemption" and instead of going out and buying a copy or purchasing a Digital Download I go and pirate a copy off of some random bit torrent site.

That's theft, there's no way to argue otherwise unless you want to get into a semantics argument over the ownership of incorporeal data which I don't.

Now then, let us also say that I really want to play "Mighty Bomb Jack".
I can't finding it for download on the Wii Virtual Console and it isn't available on any classic compilations. This game hasn't been in production for decades and as such I have no way to purchase it.

In this second scenario I see piracy as a victimless crime. Nobody gets cheated out of their cut of the profits because there was no profit to be made in the first place.

First scenario is victimless as well, because RDR isn't on PC, so there'd be no way for Rockstar to make money off you.

And isn't pirating console games really, really hard?

I just lost respect for this administration.

Seriously? Well, I just lost respect for you.

You won't even ask why I lost my respect for the administration? Oh well, I'll just tell you anyway.

Piracy is not theft, period. To state that it's theft shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what piracy is and giving that it's coming from an administration that's pushing an act to give copyright holders the ability to more aggressively pursue pirates it's just unforgivable.

What is piracy, then?

It's like reading a book at a bookstore without buying it. Well, that's more like video streaming...

Okay, it's like it libraries were on the internet, illegal, and run by a bunch of nerds in Sweden. And they don't have any books.

I don't think it is. It's more like if libraries were on the internet, illegal, run by a bunch of nerds and contained nothing but books that publishers spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep out of libraries.

Or like if you went into a bookstore, read a book, and then tore out all the pages and left the cover.

It's like people who defend piracy as not-theft don't want to admit what you're paying for when you buy a DVD. HINT: It's not the box art.

With the second example, it wouldn't be tearing the pages out, because everyone else could still read it.

And as for the first one, if books were a big enough industry, publishers and authors would try and keep the books out of the library. As it stands, big book publishers release lots of books a year, partly because each one isn't going to be super profitable unless it's Harry Potter, and partly because libraries will make each one lose a fair amount of sales.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

I'm sorry but just admit it! Piracy is wrong and it is theft.
It's just like how many smokers can't admit smoking is bad for you.

They do, they're either just resigned to it or don't mind. Way back when they brushed such stuff off, but now most of them are aware of it.

 

[NotSoNimble]

The problem here, as always is that this isn't a strictly black and white issue.

Let us pretend for a moment that I want to own a copy of "Red Dead Redemption" and instead of going out and buying a copy or purchasing a Digital Download I go and pirate a copy off of some random bit torrent site.

That's theft, there's no way to argue otherwise unless you want to get into a semantics argument over the ownership of incorporeal data which I don't.

Now then, let us also say that I really want to play "Mighty Bomb Jack".
I can't finding it for download on the Wii Virtual Console and it isn't available on any classic compilations. This game hasn't been in production for decades and as such I have no way to purchase it.

In this second scenario I see piracy as a victimless crime. Nobody gets cheated out of their cut of the profits because there was no profit to be made in the first place.

Here ya go.

http://www.google.com/products?q=Mighty%20Bomb%20Jack&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wf

 

[Cynical skeptic]

-snip-

Hi, I just want to say something real quick.

You realize the reason most people don't really attempt to defend piracy around here is because there is no point? They're taken aback by the sheer quantity of misconception and the amount of propaganda regurgitated. The anti-piracy crowd wins by default because their arguments are presented as a tangled mess that no one wants to take the time to unravel.

But I've said it before and I'll say it again. Staunch anti-piracy does not defend the artist, musician, or developer. It defends the studio, the publisher, the label. The people who's one and only reason for existence is to control distribution of other people's ideas.

 

[Celtic_Kerr]

If they're really so sad about the musicians, they'd force the labels to give them more than they currently do.

Capitalism dude. The government is not allowed to intervene with a private company. You're thinking socialism in Canada.

And no, you're wring. If they cared about the muisicians, they'd stop people from stealing their music from the internet.

 

[JuryNelson]

The problem here, as always is that this isn't a strictly black and white issue.

Let us pretend for a moment that I want to own a copy of "Red Dead Redemption" and instead of going out and buying a copy or purchasing a Digital Download I go and pirate a copy off of some random bit torrent site.

That's theft, there's no way to argue otherwise unless you want to get into a semantics argument over the ownership of incorporeal data which I don't.

Now then, let us also say that I really want to play "Mighty Bomb Jack".
I can't finding it for download on the Wii Virtual Console and it isn't available on any classic compilations. This game hasn't been in production for decades and as such I have no way to purchase it.

In this second scenario I see piracy as a victimless crime. Nobody gets cheated out of their cut of the profits because there was no profit to be made in the first place.

First scenario is victimless as well, because RDR isn't on PC, so there'd be no way for Rockstar to make money off you.

And isn't pirating console games really, really hard?

I just lost respect for this administration.

Seriously? Well, I just lost respect for you.

You won't even ask why I lost my respect for the administration? Oh well, I'll just tell you anyway.

Piracy is not theft, period. To state that it's theft shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what piracy is and giving that it's coming from an administration that's pushing an act to give copyright holders the ability to more aggressively pursue pirates it's just unforgivable.

What is piracy, then?

It's like reading a book at a bookstore without buying it. Well, that's more like video streaming...

Okay, it's like it libraries were on the internet, illegal, and run by a bunch of nerds in Sweden. And they don't have any books.

I don't think it is. It's more like if libraries were on the internet, illegal, run by a bunch of nerds and contained nothing but books that publishers spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep out of libraries.

Or like if you went into a bookstore, read a book, and then tore out all the pages and left the cover.

It's like people who defend piracy as not-theft don't want to admit what you're paying for when you buy a DVD. HINT: It's not the box art.

With the second example, it wouldn't be tearing the pages out, because everyone else could still read it.

And as for the first one, if books were a big enough industry, publishers and authors would try and keep the books out of the library. As it stands, big book publishers release lots of books a year, partly because each one isn't going to be super profitable unless it's Harry Potter, and partly because libraries will make each one lose a fair amount of sales.

Well, the analogy is pretty broken mostly because books aren't movies or video games, and the industries and protections work differently.

The reason stuff like this sucks is that might allow businesses to essentially deputize themselves. THAT's what we need to be worried about. Not whether or not people who take things without paying them are thieves.

Piracy IS theft, and it should be treated as such. By requiring PROOF and a FAIR TRIAL and enforcement by POLICE and not ACTIVISION.

 

[oppp7]

For as long as this debate has gone on, why the FUCK can't you people decide on something?

OT: Woo... ACTA... Awesome?
I don't know enough about it to really disagree with it or not. From what I've heard, it takes enforcing copyright laws too far, but then again, the law has the right to search everything anyways...

 

[JuryNelson]

snip

Actually it's most like going to the author's publishers, copying every page word for word and giving copies away to people willy nilly on a street corner. And yet if I did that I'd be a criminal, no questions asked.

And if a given administration called you a thief, there wouldn't be any outcry about it anywhere on the Internet.

Thank you for fixing my analogy. That one is way better.

 

[oppp7]

Well I can hardly blame them for thinking like that.

Really, you can hardly blame them for being idiots thinking that the US is losing trillions of dollars because of piracy? These people need to get fucking real and target a real problem.

Also this. Seriously, aren't there bigger issues than huge corporations losing some money?

 

[Ironic Pirate]

The problem here, as always is that this isn't a strictly black and white issue.

Let us pretend for a moment that I want to own a copy of "Red Dead Redemption" and instead of going out and buying a copy or purchasing a Digital Download I go and pirate a copy off of some random bit torrent site.

That's theft, there's no way to argue otherwise unless you want to get into a semantics argument over the ownership of incorporeal data which I don't.

Now then, let us also say that I really want to play "Mighty Bomb Jack".
I can't finding it for download on the Wii Virtual Console and it isn't available on any classic compilations. This game hasn't been in production for decades and as such I have no way to purchase it.

In this second scenario I see piracy as a victimless crime. Nobody gets cheated out of their cut of the profits because there was no profit to be made in the first place.

First scenario is victimless as well, because RDR isn't on PC, so there'd be no way for Rockstar to make money off you.

And isn't pirating console games really, really hard?

I just lost respect for this administration.

Seriously? Well, I just lost respect for you.

You won't even ask why I lost my respect for the administration? Oh well, I'll just tell you anyway.

Piracy is not theft, period. To state that it's theft shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what piracy is and giving that it's coming from an administration that's pushing an act to give copyright holders the ability to more aggressively pursue pirates it's just unforgivable.

What is piracy, then?

It's like reading a book at a bookstore without buying it. Well, that's more like video streaming...

Okay, it's like it libraries were on the internet, illegal, and run by a bunch of nerds in Sweden. And they don't have any books.

I don't think it is. It's more like if libraries were on the internet, illegal, run by a bunch of nerds and contained nothing but books that publishers spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep out of libraries.

Or like if you went into a bookstore, read a book, and then tore out all the pages and left the cover.

It's like people who defend piracy as not-theft don't want to admit what you're paying for when you buy a DVD. HINT: It's not the box art.

With the second example, it wouldn't be tearing the pages out, because everyone else could still read it.

And as for the first one, if books were a big enough industry, publishers and authors would try and keep the books out of the library. As it stands, big book publishers release lots of books a year, partly because each one isn't going to be super profitable unless it's Harry Potter, and partly because libraries will make each one lose a fair amount of sales.

Well, the analogy is pretty broken mostly because books aren't movies or video games, and the industries and protections work differently.

The reason stuff like this sucks is that might allow businesses to essentially deputize themselves. THAT's what we need to be worried about. Not whether or not people who take things without paying them are thieves.

Piracy IS theft, and it should be treated as such. By requiring PROOF and a FAIR TRIAL and enforcement by POLICE and not ACTIVISION.

While piracy is wrong, it's not quite theft. That's more of an issue of semantics, however.

 

[Jake the Snake]

While i agree with the administration on this (ie Piracy is wrong, it's basically stealing, and you should be punished for it) I think that there should be certain degrees of punishment, depending on the offense. For people who've just downloaded a few songs or say a film, it isn't fair to fine them heavily for it. On top of that, most of the people who illegally download stuff are stupid kids that don't have to money to pay for the shit to begin with. Am I saying what they did was justified? Absolutely not, I'm just saying its wrong to have such harsh punishments enacted on minor offenses. You wouldn't throw someone in jail for trying to steal a CD, you would however if they robbed an entire music store.

 

[JuryNelson]

While piracy is wrong, it's not quite theft. That's more of an issue of semantics, however.

The bummer is that this whole thing is an issue of semantics. They say piracy is theft, you say piracy is something other than theft.

Unfortunately, the only people who ever tend to get heard are the people who say "We need to stamp out this pirate menace" and the people who say "St33l teh gam3z! LoL! DRM = Fascism!"

You seem level headed about it, you should run for office. Make some well-intentioned, reasonable noise up there.

 

[JuryNelson]

Well I can hardly blame them for thinking like that.

Really, you can hardly blame them for being idiots thinking that the US is losing trillions of dollars because of piracy? These people need to get fucking real and target a real problem.

You can hardly blame them for thinking that taking something without paying for it constitutes stealing. They don't understand the ins and outs of digital distribution and creative copyright like you seem to, so yeah. Thinking that getting something that costs money without spending any money is not a crazy thing to think.

 

[LWS666]

i hate it when people claim piracy is theft, as it proves they've not actually researched the subject before giving their opinion.

although i agree piracy is bad, it's copyright infringment and should not be given as harsh a punishment as theft, as if you pirate then shops are losing out on your money, while theft is stealing the value of that game.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

While piracy is wrong, it's not quite theft. That's more of an issue of semantics, however.

The bummer is that this whole thing is an issue of semantics. They say piracy is theft, you say piracy is something other than theft.

Unfortunately, the only people who ever tend to get heard are the people who say "We need to stamp out this pirate menace" and the people who say "St33l teh gam3z! LoL! DRM = Fascism!"

You seem level headed about it, you should run for office. Make some well-intentioned, reasonable noise up there.

But you can't put "X is a multi-faceted issue that requires a case by case look and is more up to society to solve than any government figure" on a button, can you? Has to be "Y is a Nazi!" "Z is communist!", short, quick, and easy to understand. That does, however, make things more accessible, but how simple is too simple?

But that's something for a different topic.