Poll: Is it piracy when you already own the material?

[TomLikesGuitar]

No it is not.

End of discussion.

Really, it depends what you mean. If you are asking if it is legal, the answer is yes, absolutely. If you are asking about the semantics of the word piracy, then there is no real answer, and this conversation will go on forever.

As per the legality of it, it only makes sense...

We are in an age where digital backups are necessary. Also, sometimes data needs to be altered slightly for maximum efficiency, and it is easier to download it as such from another source. For example, anyone who watches Rifftrax knows they come as mp3's that you play over a movie. Not only is it a pain to sync, but adjusting the volume is nigh impossible. So downloading a movie with the Rifftrax built in is the easiest option, and 100% legal. Also think about downloading an .iso for a game. If you want to play a game from a virtual drive you need an image on your hard drive. It is usually way easier/cheaper to just download one than it is to create your own.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

Yes, and the idea that it isn't is silly. No matter what, you now have one more of the item at hand that you paid for. If you lose a dollar, you don't take a dollar from someone else to make up for your lost dollar. Sure, it's not like you're physically taking someone else's dollar, but that's about $100 worth of profit lost for the company because you now own two instead of one.

Honestly, I doubt a company would be that stingy when it comes to matters like this. If someone bought a CD I made and then lost it, I wouldn't mind giving them another copy for free. In fact, I wouldn't even mind if they didn't even pay for it in the first place. But it's still technically pirating. Most people probably wouldn't mind, but saying that it isn't stealing is silly self-justification.

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

Legally, yes. Ethically, no.

That makes no sense what-so-ever.

If you paid for digital material, and you download another copy from an alternative source, where is the ethical dilemma?

EDIT: Whoops, I'm retarded and I read that backwards...

EDIT 2:But yeah, legally it is actually not a problem so long as you can prove you purchased an initial copy.

If I already own a Volvo, but I can't get it to work, is it okay for me to steal a Volvo then?

Digital copies are quite different than those that exist in reality, my friend.

In order to use this analogy, you would have to imagine a world where Volvo's are free to copy and redistribute. Then you would have to imagine that you paid for a license to use said Volvo, as opposed to the Volvo itself. Then you would have to imagine that you getting a Volvo from an alternative source after having previously paid for one has no effect on Volvo or any of it's affiliates and...

Well... look... it's just a bad analogy.

 

[UltraJacob]

A popular game on Project 64, a Nintendo 64 game emulator is Super Mario 64. When downloading it there is a warning stating that it is not legal if you do not actually own Super Mario 64.

Using this logic, if you owned the content at some point then pirating it is fine. (Forgive me if I said something off topic. I simply skimmed the article.)

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

Yes, and the idea that it isn't is silly. No matter what, you now have one more of the item at hand that you paid for. If you lose a dollar, you don't take a dollar from someone else to make up for your lost dollar. Sure, it's not like you're physically taking someone else's dollar, but that's about $100 worth of profit lost for the company because you now own two instead of one.

Honestly, I doubt a company would be that stingy when it comes to matters like this. If someone bought a CD I made and then lost it, I wouldn't mind giving them another copy for free. In fact, I wouldn't even mind if they didn't even pay for it in the first place. But it's still technically pirating. Most people probably wouldn't mind, but saying that it isn't stealing is silly self-justification.

So if you download a game from a distributor and the files become corrupted, you don't believe you have the right to download it from another source?

Legally, you have the right to access said material. If it is found in your possession, you are in 0 legal trouble.

You need to understand that digital copies have COMPLETELY different rules, regulations, and even moral standards than physical copies.

 

[mikespoff]

I don't think it qualifies as piracy.

Piracy involves acquiring digital material which you should have bought but that you did not pay for. In this case, you've already bought the material, you're really just using digital services to make a backup of the material. It's like ripping your own CDs to your mp3 player so that you can listen to them on the go.

 

[Not-here-anymore]

If you own a book, film, or music album, I believe you're legally entitled to a back-up, provided you can show proof of ownership if called up on it. But don't quote me on that.
PC software is a little trickier, since you technically own a licence, not the product itself.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

So if you download a game from a distributor and the files become corrupted, you don't believe you have the right to download it from another source?

Legally, you have the right to access said material. If it is found in your possession, you are in 0 legal trouble.

You need to understand that digital copies have COMPLETELY different rules, regulations, and even moral standards than physical copies.

You have the right to access the material that you paid for. You paid for one copy that got corrupted.

And no, they don't have different rules. Just because something isn't physical doesn't make it any less merchandise. The only difference is the fact that you can't hold it in your hand and there is infinite availability and even that is no excuse. What laws/rules/regulations say that stealing music is different than stealing an actual physical object? Like I said, the difference is that there isn't an unlimited amount of physical copies. When you steal a physical copy, the company loses the object and the potential profit of selling the item. If you buy the copy, they lose the object but with the actual profit making up for the item that they no longer have. When you pirate something online, the company loses only the potential profit since they aren't receiving money for the object, yet they aren't losing the object in the process. This works for one, two, three, or a million objects. If you lost whatever you bought, too bad. I've lost socks. That doesn't give me the right to go and steal socks that are just the same, even though there is a virtually infinite supply of socks in the world.

Technically, it's stealing. No one involved with the production of the DVDs this guy is talking about is being paid for two copies, they've been paid for one. Honestly, I doubt they would care. Like I said, I certainly wouldn't care if someone did it. But that doesn't change the fact that it's the same thing, whether you owned it already or not. It's still piracy. Whether it's right or wrong is a completely different matter.

 

[adderseal]

For the acquaintance thing:
Example 1: You do not own a legally bought, physical copy of an album, but you father does. You ask him for it so that you can rip it to your computer and stick it on your iPod. You enjoy the music without paying a single penny. This is seen by people as OK.
Example 2: You do not own a legally bought, physical copy of an album, and you do not know anybody who does. You look online for it and download a torrent of it, uploaded by someone who has bought a legal, physical copy. You stick it onto your iPod. You enjoy the music without paying a single penny. This is seen by people as NOT OK.

I don't see anything morally wrong with scenario 2, but many people do. I would be interested to hear people's opinions. Obviously I also answered 'No' on the poll.

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

So if you download a game from a distributor and the files become corrupted, you don't believe you have the right to download it from another source?

Legally, you have the right to access said material. If it is found in your possession, you are in 0 legal trouble.

You need to understand that digital copies have COMPLETELY different rules, regulations, and even moral standards than physical copies.

You have the right to access the material that you paid for. You paid for one copy that got corrupted.

And no, they don't have different rules. Just because something isn't physical doesn't make it any less merchandise. The only difference is the fact that you can't hold it in your hand and there is infinite availability and even that is no excuse. What laws/rules/regulations say that stealing music is different than stealing an actual physical object? Like I said, the difference is that there isn't an unlimited amount of physical copies. When you steal a physical copy, the company loses the object and the potential profit of selling the item. If you buy the copy, they lose the object but with the actual profit making up for the item that they no longer have. When you pirate something online, the company loses only the potential profit since they aren't receiving money for the object, yet they aren't losing the object in the process. This works for one, two, three, or a million objects. If you lost whatever you bought, too bad. I've lost socks. That doesn't give me the right to go and steal socks that are just the same, even though there is a virtually infinite supply of socks in the world.

Technically, it's stealing. No one involved with the production of the DVDs this guy is talking about is being paid for two copies, they've been paid for one. Honestly, I doubt they would care. Like I said, I certainly wouldn't care if someone did it. But that doesn't change the fact that it's the same thing, whether you owned it already or not. It's still piracy. Whether it's right or wrong is a completely different matter.

I'm sorry, but you're wrong. If you don't believe me ask a local digital rights attorney if you know one.

Right now you are comparing apples and oranges.

When you download digital material, you pay for a license to own said material. Unless it is otherwise specified in the terms and conditions, you are ALWAYS allowed to make backups of digital material. However, by your logic, this is some sort of nondescript theft.

Digital copies of previously owned material cost the company 0 dollars to produce, they cost the companies affiliates 0 dollars to distribute/advertise/whatever, they cost shareholders 0 points on the DOW; they are virtually free SO LONG AS THE INITIAL COPY WAS PAID FOR.

Think of it this way, you could back up EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF MEDIA YOU OWN on torrents, and then download them later and it has the EXACT same legal ramifications.

But really, the people in this thread are insulting their own intelligence by comparing physical goods to digital media. To say that the rules regarding the two are even remotely similar is naive and ignorant.

So yeah... sorry again, but if we are talking about legality, you're wrong.

 

[Wicky_42]

Legally, yeah. Which sucks. Morally though, fuck 'em - you've bought it once, own a licence - if no-one else's using your physical copy, what's the big deal? No argument other than a purely legal one can be brought against you.

 

[Frankleton]

It is my opinion that if you either already own the media then it is okay to pirate it. That is merely piracy because its convenient and its not economically efficient for me to drive an hour back home from university in order to get my Venture Brothers DVD when I can download it now.

Also I think it is okay to pirate something, like a game or song, that isn't currently for sale. If they aren't making it readily available for you to buy, then by all means pirate it because they obviously don't want to make any money off of it. I'll give the example of The Split CD by Queens of the Stone Age. It is currently out of print and is the only place to listen to The Bronze, an incredible song and therefore if QotSA don't want to make money off of it, then I will pirate it.

 

[Wicky_42]

You have the right to access the material that you paid for. You paid for one copy that got corrupted.
...
And no, they don't have different rules. Just because something isn't physical doesn't make it any less merchandise.

1) No - buying the media is to purchase a license to use said media, not to physically possess a single copy of it. Hence digital distribution allowing multiple downloads and all that good stuff. If your copy is corrupted, you've already purchased a license, have a CD key, whatever, so feel free to download the install files from somewhere else. After all, it was the publishers who chose to sell you a license rather than a product.

2) See above point about licenses - because it's data you're buying, publishers have decided that it is in fact not merchandise, it's some sort of strange pseudo-service with very different rules to what you'd expect from purchasing something in a shop.

Your arguments are flawed, especially since you're allowed to make digital backups of your software and digital media for the event that your physical media is damaged - I'd argue that it doesn't matter what source that backup comes from, if you have purchased it at any point.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

So if you download a game from a distributor and the files become corrupted, you don't believe you have the right to download it from another source?

Legally, you have the right to access said material. If it is found in your possession, you are in 0 legal trouble.

You need to understand that digital copies have COMPLETELY different rules, regulations, and even moral standards than physical copies.

You have the right to access the material that you paid for. You paid for one copy that got corrupted.

And no, they don't have different rules. Just because something isn't physical doesn't make it any less merchandise. The only difference is the fact that you can't hold it in your hand and there is infinite availability and even that is no excuse. What laws/rules/regulations say that stealing music is different than stealing an actual physical object? Like I said, the difference is that there isn't an unlimited amount of physical copies. When you steal a physical copy, the company loses the object and the potential profit of selling the item. If you buy the copy, they lose the object but with the actual profit making up for the item that they no longer have. When you pirate something online, the company loses only the potential profit since they aren't receiving money for the object, yet they aren't losing the object in the process. This works for one, two, three, or a million objects. If you lost whatever you bought, too bad. I've lost socks. That doesn't give me the right to go and steal socks that are just the same, even though there is a virtually infinite supply of socks in the world.

Technically, it's stealing. No one involved with the production of the DVDs this guy is talking about is being paid for two copies, they've been paid for one. Honestly, I doubt they would care. Like I said, I certainly wouldn't care if someone did it. But that doesn't change the fact that it's the same thing, whether you owned it already or not. It's still piracy. Whether it's right or wrong is a completely different matter.

I'm sorry, but you're wrong. If you don't believe me ask a local digital rights attorney if you know one.

Right now you are comparing apples and oranges.

When you download digital material, you pay for a license to own said material. Unless it is otherwise specified in the terms and conditions, you are ALWAYS allowed to make backups of digital material. However, by your logic, this is some sort of nondescript theft.

Digital copies of previously owned material cost the company 0 dollars to produce, they cost the companies affiliates 0 dollars to distribute/advertise/whatever, they cost shareholders 0 points on the DOW; they are virtually free SO LONG AS THE INITIAL COPY WAS PAID FOR.

Think of it this way, you could back up EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF MEDIA YOU OWN on torrents, and then download them later and it has the EXACT same legal ramifications.

But really, the people in this thread are insulting their own intelligence by comparing physical goods to digital media. To say that the rules regarding the two are even remotely similar is naive and ignorant.

So yeah... sorry again, but if we are talking about legality, you're wrong.

I believe this is up to the discretion of the company being stolen from. Show me a law that says what you're saying and I'll gladly accept that I'm wrong. Some guys, like the guys at Steam, will let you buy a copy of a game and install it on a hundred million computers at the same time. iTunes lets you have the same song on 5 (I think) different iTunes. Under the same account you bought the song with. If you want to activate it on more than 5, you have to buy the song again. That doesn't sound like you're purchasing a license to use the song as you please to me. And what about video game DRM where one CD key works a certain amount of times?

And the case we're talking about here is different as well. He didn't buy a license to watch the show. He bought a physical copy of the show and wants to watch the show again, but using a different type of copy altogether. He didn't buy this online in the first place.

 

[Wicky_42]

If I already own a Volvo, but I can't get it to work, is it okay for me to steal a Volvo then?

Well, yes - if by 'steal' you mean clone a car identical to your own at no material cost to anyone and without depriving anyone of their own property.

Of course, if you started to sell your cloned cars then you'd undermine the industry and bring it all crashing down INSTANTLY because, fuck, you can magic cars into existence! You have any idea how expensive and complex cars are?! You can make them for free, instantly!! Holy shit!!! You're a wizard, Harry!

Perhaps you can see now the difference between digital licences and physical property -_-;

 

[Wicky_42]

And the case we're talking about here is different as well. He didn't buy a license to watch the show. He bought a physical copy of the show and wants to watch the show again, but using a different type of copy altogether. He didn't buy this online in the first place.

I believe you're allowed a digital backup of any digital medium you purchase. As I replied to you earlier, I don't believe that there can be any issue with where you source that backup from. I mean, if you're re-seeding a torrent you've got no legal ground, but a digital copy of a film you've purchased? And that you still have in your possession? You're on good legal grounds, me thinks.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

And the case we're talking about here is different as well. He didn't buy a license to watch the show. He bought a physical copy of the show and wants to watch the show again, but using a different type of copy altogether. He didn't buy this online in the first place.

I believe you're allowed a digital backup of any digital medium you purchase. As I replied to you earlier, I don't believe that there can be any issue with where you source that backup from. I mean, if you're re-seeding a torrent you've got no legal ground, but a digital copy of a film you've purchased? And that you still have in your possession? You're on good legal grounds, me thinks.

But he didn't back up his own files. He didn't purchase digital medium.

 

[emeraldrafael]

um... I dont know.

The best way I can answer is to ask you this in return. Is it plagerism if you copy your own papers and such and dont credit it?

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

So if you download a game from a distributor and the files become corrupted, you don't believe you have the right to download it from another source?

Legally, you have the right to access said material. If it is found in your possession, you are in 0 legal trouble.

You need to understand that digital copies have COMPLETELY different rules, regulations, and even moral standards than physical copies.

You have the right to access the material that you paid for. You paid for one copy that got corrupted.

And no, they don't have different rules. Just because something isn't physical doesn't make it any less merchandise. The only difference is the fact that you can't hold it in your hand and there is infinite availability and even that is no excuse. What laws/rules/regulations say that stealing music is different than stealing an actual physical object? Like I said, the difference is that there isn't an unlimited amount of physical copies. When you steal a physical copy, the company loses the object and the potential profit of selling the item. If you buy the copy, they lose the object but with the actual profit making up for the item that they no longer have. When you pirate something online, the company loses only the potential profit since they aren't receiving money for the object, yet they aren't losing the object in the process. This works for one, two, three, or a million objects. If you lost whatever you bought, too bad. I've lost socks. That doesn't give me the right to go and steal socks that are just the same, even though there is a virtually infinite supply of socks in the world.

Technically, it's stealing. No one involved with the production of the DVDs this guy is talking about is being paid for two copies, they've been paid for one. Honestly, I doubt they would care. Like I said, I certainly wouldn't care if someone did it. But that doesn't change the fact that it's the same thing, whether you owned it already or not. It's still piracy. Whether it's right or wrong is a completely different matter.

I'm sorry, but you're wrong. If you don't believe me ask a local digital rights attorney if you know one.

Right now you are comparing apples and oranges.

When you download digital material, you pay for a license to own said material. Unless it is otherwise specified in the terms and conditions, you are ALWAYS allowed to make backups of digital material. However, by your logic, this is some sort of nondescript theft.

Digital copies of previously owned material cost the company 0 dollars to produce, they cost the companies affiliates 0 dollars to distribute/advertise/whatever, they cost shareholders 0 points on the DOW; they are virtually free SO LONG AS THE INITIAL COPY WAS PAID FOR.

Think of it this way, you could back up EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF MEDIA YOU OWN on torrents, and then download them later and it has the EXACT same legal ramifications.

But really, the people in this thread are insulting their own intelligence by comparing physical goods to digital media. To say that the rules regarding the two are even remotely similar is naive and ignorant.

So yeah... sorry again, but if we are talking about legality, you're wrong.

I believe this is up to the discretion of the company being stolen from. Show me a law that says what you're saying and I'll gladly accept that I'm wrong. Some guys, like the guys at Steam, will let you buy a copy of a game and install it on a hundred million computers at the same time. iTunes lets you have the same song on 5 (I think) different iTunes. Under the same account you bought the song with. If you want to activate it on more than 5, you have to buy the song again. That doesn't sound like you're purchasing a license to use the song as you please to me. And what about video game DRM where one CD key works a certain amount of times?

And the case we're talking about here is different as well. He didn't buy a license to watch the show. He bought a physical copy of the show and wants to watch the show again, but using a different type of copy altogether. He didn't buy this online in the first place.

You are right, it is up to the discretion of the company.

However, when unspecified, it is legal to download another copy of the files on the CD/download that you paid for. So with videogame DRM, it is absolutely legal to download a new copy of the .iso, although it is illegal to download a DIFFERENT CD key (or a keygen).

With the case in question, even though it was a different form of copy, he still owns the movies themselves.

With digital rights cases, the MOST important detail isn't whether or not they catch you in the act of downloading a file. The most important thing is that you can prove that you already own the data in any form and/or have paid for it previously.

Like I said before, the TC could have just uploaded the show to a torrent himself for later use. He would probably be just as likely to be flagged downloading his own content, so the burden of proof comes down to ownership of data, and/or ownership of a license, which he has.

 

[Wicky_42]

And the case we're talking about here is different as well. He didn't buy a license to watch the show. He bought a physical copy of the show and wants to watch the show again, but using a different type of copy altogether. He didn't buy this online in the first place.

I believe you're allowed a digital backup of any digital medium you purchase. As I replied to you earlier, I don't believe that there can be any issue with where you source that backup from. I mean, if you're re-seeding a torrent you've got no legal ground, but a digital copy of a film you've purchased? And that you still have in your possession? You're on good legal grounds, me thinks.

But he didn't back up his own files. He didn't purchase digital medium.

DVDs are very much a digital medium (just like games on disks), and I would think you are very much allowed to own a backup for the event that the disk gets scratched. I believe it's (however) illegal to circumvent the copy protection on the disk, so downloading a copy is probably the most legal option. He's already bought it, what's the issue?