Internet Piracy

C

Card Slinger J

Aspiring Trainer
Member
What is your stance on Internet Piracy? Here's my 2 questions
for this debate:

1) What do you think would happen If Internet Piracy was legalized?

and

2) Could Internet Piracy ever grow out of control, regardless of it's legality?

Here's what I think:

1) The people who work in Hollywood and the Mainstream Music Industry would lose more jobs which is why you see the lack of good Movies and Music nowadays because most of the profits have gone towards Online Businesses like eBay and Amazon, Social Media such as YouTube and Facebook, and Webshows like with That Guy With The Glasses.com or Channel Awesome!

There's a website known as creativeamerica.org that is Pro Protect IP/SOPA/E-Parasite cause they are against Content Theft which is short term for Copyright Infringement. They don't want to reach a compromise with the people who are against these bills so instead they are forcing Big Government and Corporations to shove this down our throats by stripping people's 1st Amendment rights of expressing free speech and innovation.

The only problem is the companies who supply the content that is illegally streamed and downloaded don't get paid a single dime for what they do anymore. I get that downloading content helps you save money for stuff you're wasting buying a Music CD but still you're sort of "stealing" their stuff and they're not gaining a profit from it at all. This is why we need music rentals instead of having to download mp3's but whatever.

It's sad that Hollywood, Big Corporations, and the Entertainment Industry as a whole isn't looking into the Internet for their business models and refuses to adapt to the current changes in technology while still making a buck. They want things their way and we want our stuff our way, nobody wins and it becomes as bad of a gridlock as you currently see with the Republicans and Democrats in Washington and Congress.

2) Internet Piracy has already grown out of control, it's already gotten to a point where every American is above the law and corrupt political lobbyists are trying to copy what the people are doing to force people under their false sense of freedom and justice. I mean come on now, Is the Internet really responsible for why there's no Economic Growth in this country? There's people making money through online businesses so I don't see what the big problem is here.

You want to know some of the reasons why people pirate movies, music, games, and such or stream their content? It's because they don't want to get up or be at a certain time just to watch or listen to something when they can access it at anytime at their disposal. Why get rid of the flexibility of watching and listening to entertainment at any time you want? Why be forced to catch something on TV but If you miss out you don't get a second chance? You know what I mean? Think about it we've all been there. Late for a TV show's airing or missed a song on the radio? what's wrong with getting around that?
 
So are you still in favor of the U.S. Government shutting down websites like PokeBeach through the possible passage of SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act)? Is buying merchandise on eBay considered piracy even though people are making money out of it? What about Amazon.com?

You're as Anti-Content Theft as CreativeAmerica.org. We are dealing with an issue where no two sides will win unless they compromise onto something, what that may be I have no idea. This is like getting Israel to make peace with Palestine or the Democrats to work with the Republicans while throwing away idealogies.
 
Piracy is the stealing of things or taking without permission. What on pb is stealing or taking without permission. Same with eBay. I am a seller on eBay. The people PAY for what they get. You do not seem to understand the difference between selling things on line and illegally stealing a video.
 
1) Then it would defeat all purpose of actually going out and buying the product

2)Well, yes I think so, because it is pretty bad in general. I mean pirating is illegal, yet that doesn't really stop anyone from doing it. It is running pretty ramp-id already so if it was legalized then it would just get worse.
 
Card Slinger J, let's actually go over what "piracy" is. PokéBeach wouldn't be considered pirating anything because it doesn't take anything that requires permission. Taking pictures of cards is not pirating. Taking pictures of pages of magazines is quite a bit more questionable. Distributing news, even those that are news leaks, is far from considered piracy. Piracy is the act of stealing or using copyrighted content as is. I don't know what silly media site gave you such a ridiculous definition of piracy (buy merchandise is piracy, lol, it's just too funny), but look it up. Even Wikipedia has a decent definition of it.

eBay steals nothing. What on earth are you accusing them of piracy for?

On the topic of piracy itself:
You want to know some of the reasons why people pirate movies, music, games, and such or stream their content? It's because they don't want to get up or be at a certain time just to watch or listen to something when they can access it at anytime at their disposal. Why get rid of the flexibility of watching and listening to entertainment at any time you want? Why be forced to catch something on TV but If you miss out you don't get a second chance? You know what I mean? Think about it we've all been there. Late for a TV show's airing or missed a song on the radio? what's wrong with getting around that?
Click to expand...
Absolute nonsense. You want to conveniently get movies, go sign up for Netflix. You can buy music easily at the comfort of your seat from iTunes and Napster. Software from BrightHouse Networks lets you record late night shows that you can watch whenever you have free time to do so. If music firms demands money for their music to be legally distributed, then so be it. People who post videos of songs from that firm deserve to have the music taken down. If YouTube starts taking action against piracy, there will be no repercussions. In fact, that's exactly the case. Pure content of media is taken down from YouTube while parodies and satire are protected under the Fair Use Act.

If action is done against piracy, that is like saying people who steal things are to return the items. It's better than having your hand cut off, anyway.



Bonus stuff:
Card Slinger J said:
You're as Anti-Content Theft as CreativeAmerica.org. We are dealing with an issue where no two sides will win unless they compromise onto something, what that may be I have no idea. This is like getting Israel to make peace with Palestine or the Democrats to work with the Republicans while throwing away idealogies.
Click to expand...
Dude, are you advocating Content Thievery? There is no compromise. We don't own what we take. The music industry has slammed charges on individuals from time to time for piracy. You are a mere person that is just hoping to get away with whatever you pirate. If they catch you, oh well, just stop it and pay appropriate fines. Whining about it is stupid.
 
1) Piracy's never going to be made legal. Internet or any other kind.
2) It's already out of control.
 
Zyflair said:

Dude, are you advocating Content Thievery? There is no compromise. We don't own what we take. The music industry has slammed charges on individuals from time to time for piracy. You are a mere person that is just hoping to get away with whatever you pirate. If they catch you, oh well, just stop it and pay appropriate fines. Whining about it is stupid.
Click to expand...


It wasn't my intention to offend you at all, and If I did I apologize.
To some people Internet Piracy is a touchy subject and to others like yourself it's not,
I think what most people fear the most in terms of the issue of Protect IP and SOPA that revolves around Internet Piracy is they don't want the U.S. Government to limit their free speech on the Net regardless If that is using copyrighted material to express their opinions especially on webshows like on YouTube, they should at least most of the time give credit to what copyrights they are using.

I think that's what it really boils down to, people still want to be able to go to the sites they want to go to on the Internet like they have been without the Government telling them what sites they can go on and what not cause that infringes on people's 1st Amendment rights. Alot of the stuff on the current SOPA bill is so vague that it cripples the very fabric of the Internet, now sure Internet Piracy does play a role in this issue and by the time it comes to a head free media on the net could very likely never be the same again.

Zyflair I'm not trying to be a criminal alright, I'm not trying to advocate Content Thievery, and you're right we don't own what we take unless we pay for it. I'm not choosing a side in which is whoever is for these bills trying to pass into Congress or against them as I was trying to reach a common ground but as you pointed out earlier there is none. Either way it seems like the U.S. Government is going to limit people's 1st Amendment rights in terms of Copyrights whether If people like it or not, pirating has played a role in hurting the global economy, If there is a solution to all this that benefits the people who are for and against Protect IP and SOPA then maybe there could still be a positive transition down the road, or not, who knows... :/
 
Actually it is not that big of a deal to pirate something because it does save a ton of money. Why not just legalize it? That is just my opinion. I don't see any harm. Your not hurting anyone so why not make it legal?:)
 
That's part of what we were talking about, you can't legalize Internet Piracy because nobody's making a profit from it and we've already proven that Internet Piracy has greatly hurt the Global Economy. Why do you think the Music and Movie Industries nowadays suck? They aren't getting paid enough for doing a good job. Money = Motivation. They lacked motivation but they did it anyway just to get by with their lives and we are talking about celebrities nowadays that are just in it for the money discarding any quality whatsoever.

I get what you're saying that pirating something does save a ton of money, but you better have a good excuse for doing it cause otherwise you're already breaking the law. Pirating content off the Internet currently according to U.S. Government Law is only considered a misdemeanor. If Protect IP and/or SOPA passes it would be changed to a felony with a
5 year prison sentence. Zyflair is right though, If you have a good excuse to pirate media off the Internet you're better off doing it through iTunes or Netflix or something. Then again there usually is no good excuse for pirating anyway, it's a guilt just as bad as sin.
 
I think what most people fear the most in terms of the issue of Protect IP and SOPA that revolves around Internet Piracy is they don't want the U.S. Government to limit their free speech on the Net regardless If that is using copyrighted material to express their opinions especially on webshows like on YouTube, they should at least most of the time give credit to what copyrights they are using.
Click to expand...
And it's an awfully irrational fear. Free speech (in this case) wouldn't be affect as long as your videos compose of simply talking (Vlogs, I suppose).

Second thing is that the internet is so huge that the only way the US government could figure out how to censor anything effectively is to be pretty much like China. Attempting a large-scale censorship of that size would be ridiculously obvious to hackers. It's not as if Government isn't already influencing the media anyway (or censoring certain things).

Thirdly, you want to access any site that governments block? If you want to prepare for the worst-case scenario, look up what a DNS is. Try a different DNS rather than the one your ISP provides you. The difference could be remarkable. Google also have a DNS of their own (8.8.8.8) that you could use in a site blockdown, but remember that rather than having your ISP controlling your site browsing, Google would be in charge then. It all boils down to who you trust. ;3

Lastly, I see nothing about the 1st Amendment being in danger by actions taken against piracy. Copyright is an exception to the amendment in the first place: you can't freely claim things that aren't yours. If you use something, you are under a legal obligation to give due credit. That concept has been around since the start of Copyright (as it was more or less the intention). I suggest you give me an example that doesn't involve YouTube (as they have already been working out the Copyright issues) to show me just possibly how enforcement against copyright infringement would mean unnecessary limits on free speech.
 
Card Slinger J said:
That's part of what we were talking about, you can't legalize Internet Piracy because nobody's making a profit from it and we've already proven that Internet Piracy has greatly hurt the Global Economy. Why do you think the Music and Movie Industries nowadays suck? They aren't getting paid enough for doing a good job. Money = Motivation. They lacked motivation but they did it anyway just to get by with their lives and we are talking about celebrities nowadays that are just in it for the money discarding any quality whatsoever.

I get what you're saying that pirating something does save a ton of money, but you better have a good excuse for doing it cause otherwise you're already breaking the law. Pirating content off the Internet currently according to U.S. Government Law is only considered a misdemeanor. If Protect IP and/or SOPA passes it would be changed to a felony with a
5 year prison sentence. Zyflair is right though, If you have a good excuse to pirate media off the Internet you're better off doing it through iTunes or Netflix or something. Then again there usually is no good excuse for pirating anyway, it's a guilt just as bad as sin.
Click to expand...

As long as you do it within your own household it is basically fine. There is no law saying you can't do it in your own home for your own personal use only. The ones that get caught are the ones that do it and then post it online. If it is for your own personal use or within your friends and family then it is not usually a problem. Posting it online is what usually gets you caught in the first place and it is a year in jail and a $250,000 fine if you are caught XD. Just don't post it on any website and you will be fine XD.:)
 
The hard truth of the matter in regards to Internet Piracy and SOPA is that it's bought and paid for the Big Businesses of the Entertainment Industry to kill Small Businesses especially those Online that use Copyrighted Material as a form of free speech, that's how the Corporate World works. They buyout and undermine the competition without giving human decency a second thought.

They want to dominate the market with their mediocre crap which is why they are pushing so hard to get SOPA passed. The Government loves it too because they can essentially control information people receive in America. If there's something in the world they don't want us to know about, we'll never know. Why do you think the WikiLeaks Scandal with Julian Assange was the tip of the iceberg in the U.S. Government's attempts to regulate the Internet?

The Internet has essentially replaced the need for a television or to go to the movies through streaming (legal and otherwise). They want peoples' butts in overpriced seats in movie theaters, they want people to buy expensive TV's and exuberant cable/satellite services. They don't care about the consumer, just as long as people are consuming Viacom and friends will keep making more money, it's a power play. Politicians shouldn't be above the law in America but just like how people surfing the Internet try to find loopholes to get away with their sense of justice so could they.

With the passage of Anti-Internet Piracy Laws such as SOPA and PROTECT IP, The US would still be censoring information from other countries, like they do in China and Iran. If a forums' server is based in a foreign country like the UK then a company can shut it down without the consent of the Government to do so. There's no penalties mentioned for false or malicious reporting of legal sites.

Furthermore, there's no reason why major content providers won't try and shut down as many sites that they feel infringe on their copyright, even if it's protected under the First Amendment. In the UK, the government allowed universities to charge up to £9000 a year in tuition fees. They didn't have to charge the full amount, but most of them have. Give people power, and they will use it at the smallest possible opportunity.

The entertainment industry refuses to move to digital distribution, and they're going to drag the Internet down into the mud to do it. Buying CDs and DVDs is one thing to enjoy media content however their determination to not provide alternate ways of releasing content while making a buck is rather disappointing and since it discourages a lack of innovation in our society you're only forcing people against their will to do something that they prefer is the cheapest way possible.
 
I asked for an example. Not several more general statements. What " Small Businesses especially those Online that use Copyrighted Material as a form of free speech"? What "mediocre crap" can you be referring to? Because whatever "mediocre crap" you're talking about probably makes at least six digits.
Card Slinger J said:
The Government loves it too because they can essentially control information people receive in America. If there's something in the world they don't want us to know about, we'll never know. Why do you think the WikiLeaks Scandal with Julian Assange was the tip of the iceberg in the U.S. Government's attempts to regulate the Internet?
Click to expand...
Totally irrelevant to this argument. The Government has its own censorship agenda to follow through with. We're talking about copyright infringement. I'd write more about this but it's not even related.

Card Slinger J said:
The Internet has essentially replaced the need for a television or to go to the movies through streaming (legal and otherwise). They want peoples' butts in overpriced seats in movie theaters, they want people to buy expensive TV's and exuberant cable/satellite services.
Click to expand...
Hey, if you want excellent cable/satellite service, that's your problem. I don't care if you really want to watch some really good show, if it costs you money to get it, so be it. Oh, you don't want to pay for a movie seat? You want the other legal method? It's buying the released DVD. Not that much cheaper, now, is it? The Internet has provided alternatives to the other methods, but people took it too far (because we like free stuff and shortcuts). Let's be really honest here, Card Slinger J. Suppose you're actually unable to stream any of your favorite shows. Would you have to pay money now? Chances are, you have a TV already, maybe even with cable/satellite service. There's also the chance that you can watch your shows on the TV already without paying an extra dime, only that these shows are not at your free time periods. People spend extra on services not because the industry is forcing them to, but because people are enticed to.

Card Slinger J said:
Politicians shouldn't be above the law in America but just like how people surfing the Internet try to find loopholes to get away with their sense of justice so could they.
Click to expand...
First off, that's real low. Second, that's no justification at all. That's simply saying that we're no different than politicians and that we're using our tools for self-interest. Clearly, that's just more reason for industries to start putting the lid on copyright infringement.

Card Slinger J said:
Furthermore, there's no reason why major content providers won't try and shut down as many sites that they feel infringe on their copyright, even if it's protected under the First Amendment. In the UK, the government allowed universities to charge up to £9000 a year in tuition fees. They didn't have to charge the full amount, but most of them have. Give people power, and they will use it at the smallest possible opportunity.

The entertainment industry refuses to move to digital distribution, and they're going to drag the Internet down into the mud to do it. Buying CDs and DVDs is one thing to enjoy media content however their determination to not provide alternate ways of releasing content while making a buck is rather disappointing and since it discourages a lack of innovation in our society you're only forcing people against their will to do something that they prefer is the cheapest way possible.
Click to expand...
/me sighs
You don't get it, do you? First off, you claim that industries will try to close "as many sites that they feel infringe on their copyright, even if it's protected under the First Amendment." If it's infringing copyright in the first place, then how is it protected by the First Amendment? It's not. Second, I'm surprised that you're using UK tuition costs and not US gasoline costs, but regardless, that has nothing to do with whether the laws are justified or. At all. Stop using irrelevant examples.

"The entertainment refuses to move to digital distribution"? Where have you been? Music is sold through the internet extremely often. Movies are sold digitally at the convenience at your electronic device through, for example, Amazon. Did you even bother to check online if media was being sold digitally before typing that statement? Clearly not. That said, it's obvious that your statement that they have "determination to not provide alternate ways of releasing content" is blatantly false. We haven't went to the last part of your sentence:

... since it discourages a lack of innovation in our society you're only forcing people against their will to do something that they prefer is the cheapest way possible.
Click to expand...
WHAT IN ARCEUS'S NAME IS THIS, I DON'T EVEN. No, seriously, I'm not even trying to bash you right now, but this is absurd. You must have blanked out, couldn't think of anything else to write, and went "Hm, what phrase should I add in? Oh, 'lack of innovation' sounds really important and would help my argument. 'Forcing people against their will' is another."

Utter garbage. I see nothing in terms of innovation anywhere in your argument, nor did you bother to explain it. And now let me ask you: Since shoplifters will be prosecuted, does that mean stores are "forcing people against their will" from obtaining their merchandise in the "cheapest way possible"? Seriously, it does not take much to realize that your complaints about "forcing" is invalid. People shouldn't illegally stream or distribute copyrighted material, and since we are selfish, we have to be "forced" to do it, as you're pointing out.

Copyright Infringement should be stopped. That's all to it. You're trying to argue for something that isn't there.
 
Glaceon said:
Piracy is the stealing of things or taking without permission. What on PokéBeach is stealing or taking without permission. Same with eBay. I am a seller on eBay. The people PAY for what they get. You do not seem to understand the difference between selling things on line and illegally stealing a video.
Click to expand...

If you really want to get technical, pokemon cards are copyrighted, and there are defiantly scans of them on the main page, which i doubt WPM has permission to use. Leaking set information early isn't exactly a good thing to do either.
 
Actually WPM does get permission to use the cards on this site as the members that scan them go to leagues and play with the cards there then they bring the cards home that they opened and scan them into the computer. WPM is pretty strict on how he posts his card scans.

Furthermore for your FYI DIRECTV Satellite is way cheaper than Comcast cable. For the price of the premium channels they offer you only pay $45.00 a month VS over $100.00 on Comcast. Each Premium movie pack is about $16.00 on Comcast and on DIRECTV it is half that price or a little less. You guys should look into DIRECTV because you will be shocked when you compare prices XD.:)
 
Well for further clarification here is the legal anaylsis of SOPA, even though the bill got delayed recently from an angry Twitter feed we aren't out of the woods just yet:

http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2011/11/legal-analysis-of-sopa-protect.php

I don't know If this helps the debate here, probably not but it's definitely worth a read.
 
Ah, a good citation from the SOPA bill itself:
On application of the Attorney General following the commencement of an action under this section, the court may issue a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, or an injunction, in accordance with rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, against a registrant of a domain name used by the foreign infringing site or an owner or operator of the foreign infringing site or, in an action brought in rem under paragraph (2), against the foreign infringing site or a portion of such site, or the domain name used by such site, to cease and desist from undertaking any further activity as a foreign infringing site.
Click to expand...
So as obviously stated here, court will determine the final say, not the industries or the government.
 
According to Wikipedia, it was decided that the next court hearing revolving around SOPA won't be until after Congress's Holiday Break. I'm sure it is still possible for us as citizens to try to sway the decisions of the people attending this court hearing which will be the final say on whether SOPA passes or gets shot down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top