Stealing: Physical Vs. Digital

[Achilles]

The AHRA explicitly states that recording off the radio with an analog device is perfectly legal and that no action can be taken against people who do so for personal use. Using digital means to record is somewhat less clear, but from what I can tell the action is virtually the same.

Okay, this clears up not only the question I was trying to get answered but the larger question I had once I we'd addressed the first one (as much as can be expected anyway).

 

Thanks for the info.

 

Ah. Now it is suddenly about mp3s? I thought we were talking about taping from radio, and stealing newspapers in this case.

For the purposes of making my point regarding "copies" vs. "product", yes I introduced a scenario involving mp3s.

 

*pokes you in the eye*

 

I vaguely remember you coming up with the whole newspaper stuff. Eh.

Huge difference between using an analogy to make a point and trying to change the argument. *pokes you in the eye back*

 

I have acknowledged no such thing.

 

And tearing parts of my post out of context to make them sound as if won't change that either.

If you'd like to change your answer now, feel free however I think it's a moot point now compliments of Mr. Dravis' post.

[Ray Jones]

For the purposes of making my point regarding "copies" vs. "product", yes I introduced a scenario involving mp3s.

So you invoke newspapers and radio taping on analogue cassettes all over your posts, just to suddenly switch the whole thread of discussion back to digital media and try to nail previous statements made regarding a totally different matter to it? You did not really expect that one to work out for your argumentation, did you?

 

 

 

Huge difference between using an analogy to make a point and trying to change the argument.

My...I was merely explaining why the newspaper analogy that you introduced does not work. I mean you come up with it, I reply to it, and instead of coming back in a consent manner you then tell me I'm derailing the dialogue? Why did you drag it into "the dialogue" in the first place when you want it to stay monologue, or expect a certain set of answers that make your stuff look good and undisputed?

 

Plus, after I rendered your newspaper analogy useless, you now try to wind it all up and to turn it into something I'd come up with, probably aiming to derail discussion. You did not even spend one single second with trying to counter my argument any more. All you went is "hoho, slow there, this does not belong here".

 

You've lost me with that one, seriously. If you want your argumentation to go unheeded, you might as well adhere from posting it at all, or, at least consider adding a disclaimer stating whether or not you want that particular part of your post to find response, or not, and if so, you might as well outline responses that would fit with your day just to go sure.

 

 

 

If you'd like to change your answer now

Wut??

 

You, sir, deliberately misquoted my response to support your own "argumentation". Next up, you propose an abstraction of that misquoted content, being far beyond good and bad, obviously to gain even more support for your increasingly weak argumentation. I pointed that out and you now seriously tell me "go ahead and change your answer"? To what? To fit it into your idea of "the dialogue"? Are you really serious about that kind of strategy?

 

How about you posting a correction at least regarding your misquotation instead?

 

 

 

I think it's a moot point now compliments of Mr. Dravis' post.

In other words, and despite all the newspaper crap, weasel tactics, and attempts to insult my mind with the belief I would not notice you twisting my own statements --

 

recording off the radio is not theft, thus Ray 1 : Achilles 0

 

 

 

kthxbai

[Achilles]

recording off the radio is not theft, thus Ray 1 : Achilles 0

I think the "victory" is Sam's but congratulations nonetheless.

 

Since the rest of my response will only drag this thread off-topic (and I hate it when the mods snip my long posts) you'll get the rest via PM.

[Ray Jones]

no need to bother, really

[Samuel Dravis]

Surely we don't want to equate what the law says with the moral appropriateness of the act. It would not be right to steal even if the law said that you could do so without legal repercussions, correct? For make no mistake: it still is taking someone else's work for free when you record off the radio. The difference is that you're protected by statute from being sued for doing it. The question that needs answering is: What benefit does copyright law provide for our society?

 

Here is an interesting speech on just this subject. Though written long ago, I think it is equally applicable to our time.

[Web Rider]

I dunno if anyone's brought it up, but apparently there's a new treaty being discussed at the G8 in relation to this, to quote the poster:

 

Just found out about this new proposed 'law'. Don't know if anyone has heard of it yet, it's fairly new. If passed, this law would enable serious breaches of privacy, allowing border patrols/Customs officials to confiscate and destroy items they suspect of holding copyright-infringing material, and also allowing rights holders to bypass the justice system and "expeditiously obtain information identifying the alleged infringer" of their IP rights from ISPs themselves.

 

 

http://www.techcentral.ie/article.aspx?id=12145

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterf...Trade_Agreement

 

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Proposed_US_ACTA...trade_agreement (2007, leaked May 22, 2008)

 

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080...der-guards.html

 

http://ipjustice.org/wp/campaigns/acta/

 

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/2815/

 

While we're off speculating about what is or isn't legal or moral or stealing, they're changing the rules on us.

[El Sitherino]

This is why I do not have any issues with pirates or any other such downloaders. If anyone wants to get into an argument about what is morally acceptable, they need to start looking at the tactics of these rule enforcers. You can't completely alienate another individuals human rights claiming personal ownership rights, or the right to distribute your medium in your defined means.