Full Disclosure: Fw: when did piracy/theft become expression offreedom

["Jerry dePriest" <jerryde () mc net>]

Metallica used to encourage fans to record "bootlegs" and share with those 
who didnt/wouldnt/couldnt attend the shows. Now look at them:-( Metallica 
sucks btw ever since their heads got to big to fit up thier asses. This was 
around the time Cliff died. The way they treated  Jason Newsted was just 
plain wrong, but thats another subject...

I see I sparked a major debate which is what I was looking for but no one 
has addressed the fact that the feds will do what they want. By enacting 
laws we can be sure of the boundries they can/will cross. ( I know, everyone 
will still find ways to steal) I think google and such should be held 
accountable for encouraging the acts. I forsee Kimble doing Mitnick time...

Im all for PIPA in a modified form. Im not running 65000 servers that are 
based near Langley. Only a tool shats in the FBI's backyard and doesnt bring 
a bag to clean it up or at least cover it.

Im filling papers to patent 1's and 0's. Just like the guy a few years back 
who tried to patent the wheel... Its futile but i will get free publicity.

bma




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Charles Morris" <cmorris () cs odu edu>
To: <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu>
Cc: <full-disclosure () lists grok org uk>; "Zach C." <fxchip () gmail com>
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2012 3:53 AM
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] when did piracy/theft become expression 
offreedom


Dear Valdis and whoever else;

The really ridiculous points are the following:
A) Every time you execute/install/download a program you are
committing evil data theft by not only copying
"secret" or "illegal" information into
RAM/Disk/Registers/Buffers/Busses/photons coming off the screen/human
memory/history of the universe but potentially not just your physical
property but on hundreds of routers and deduplication boxen around the
earth.
B) You can't "copyright" or "own" a number, all digital
representations are numbers, due to the boolean nature (no fuzzy
data), etc.
C) Any data is a form of any other data given a specific transform,
e.g. manifold / encryption key + algo, something as trivial as XOR
D) You guys already know these points so why do we even care anymore
about what these people say? Why even have these conversations. They
will never stop. It's about greed and shortsightedness, not about what
is moral or logical. Just try to ignore them or change the subject
when the parrots start talking.

And to preempt the flames from the blind, Yes I feel artists should be
compensated for their contribution. It's 5am- bye.

On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 5:26 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/


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