Home page logo
/

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: when did piracy/theft become expression of freedom
From: Christian Sciberras <uuf6429 () gmail com>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 23:49:09 +0100

That has always been viewed from the consumer perspective.

If you look at it from the producers' perspective, you'll see their right
to withhold their creative
content until you pay something back.

While the terminology is not correct, it doesn't mean you can abuse it and
expect people
to waste time for you.


Another thing to note, if artists, software companies etc were so nice to
actually want
to give all this stuff for free, I'm pretty sure no one is forcing them to
sell their content.
So don't talk about the "they're not loosing anything" bullshit to me.

Laurelai - Yes, I'm sure McDonalds have acknowledged your human right to a
free
internet connection. Next thing they'll be feeding you for free as well....





On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 11:26 PM, <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 19:02:09 PST, "Zach C." said:

If you buy an album used, the seller generally loses possession of it,
you
gain possession of it at a reduced cost, and the original purchase still
gave the original seller and producer value.

Note that if I shoplift a CD that sucks and isn't worth the $14.99 sticker
price, I
have deprived the producer of the ability to sell it to somebody else.
 That's
the crucial point that underlies our social concept of "theft" - if I take
it from
you, you don't have it anymore.

If I copy an album that isn't worth the sticker price, and which I would
not
have purchased at that price, two things of note happen:

1) As much as the labels wish it were so, they can't count that as "lost
revenue" because it wouldn't have acccrued to them anyhow, any more than a
car
dealership can legitimately call it "lost revenue" if I walk onto their
lot,
tell the salescritter they're crazy if they think I'll pay $28K for a given
car, and walk off the lot. (Now, if they want to count the "Damn, we lost
the
$4.99 that guy *would* have paid if we charged that instead of $14.99",
they're
welcome to that. :)

2) More importantly, they still have the original bits and are free to look
for other suckers who *will* pay $14.99.

For the record, all my media is legitimately acquired, though a large
portion
*was* obtained used and if the producers don't like that, they're welcome
to go
re-read "first sale doctrine" ;)  Just trying to make people actually
engage
their neurons - this stuff is *not* easy to sort out, because intellectual
property and digital information do *not* behave the same as cars and cows
in
the physical world, and unintended consequences of policy decisions are all
*over* the place.  (DMCA anti-circumvention clause prohibiting me from
fair-use
accessing my own media, I'm looking at you. :)


_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]