downloading

L

lisa burrell

Guest
A guy at my work comes from Lithuania and there's a girl from CZ republic

they tell me due to low wages and generally lack of money in both countries

Every ones illegal downloading. In there words not mine. They see me with arm full of Cd's i buy from the CD store or asda or Salisbury's which i do not mind one bit paying for because one i like the covers i like to have the real thing. Two i have a nice quite well paid job with hours i adore and music my life.

But i get ridiculed each time for buying Cd's even had comments from the management saying why do you not download them why do you buy them

Back to the two at the top they say all the friends families have shelves full of downloaded and copied films where moneys so tight .. and its so easy to get them on the net.

One guy said he even has a downloaded copy of windows which he has been using for a good while. He says this is his second one the first Microsoft hit him with a is it a sap (forgive me if i got that wrong) virus in an update so that copy of windows would no longer work. He Thinks at the bottom line there's no one going to come knocking at your door. Because of the millions at it why should they pick on you.

Theres so many people at it .. really what is the bottom line you going to build hundreds of jails jail for illegal (which i always thought was a sick bird) downloaders.

The answer i wonder is.. why the world hell bent on ripping people off
why do they not lower the prices and more will buy them.
 
lisa burrell said:
The answer i wonder is.. why the world hell bent on ripping people off
why do they not lower the prices and more will buy them.
That's one way of looking at it, or alternatively why do people insist on stealing things that they can't afford and then use the excuse it is too expensive....

My parents never stole a new car because it was too expensive to buy....They just got a second hand car....Likewise with CD's and DVD's...If you want the latest releases you have to pay for it, the alternatie is to get an album or DVD that has been out several years and you can pick it up for pennies....Or buy it second hand....
 

mjn

Distinguished Member
So, these people can't afford something, so they just steal it.....basically.
 

GW43

Well-known Member
"If they make them cheaper, people will buy more"

Maybe - but will it do any good.

I used to get the same argument from a sales team I used to manage. We had a product that we sold into the distribution channel for £25. My salesmen used to say to me that they could sell 50% more if we reduced the price by £5. They saw it as sell x for £25, or sell 1.5x for £20, so we would be better off as a business.

What they failed to realise is that it cost the company £18 to get the item out of the door. So, to keep the company on an even keel, we would have needed to sell 3.5 times as many just to stand still.

Basic economics, and applying this to the CD market, it's easy to look at a CD and think that it's only a few pence for the disc itself and the jewel case, so why do they need to be £10?

Well, it is only a few pence for the hardware, but there are other costs that have to be taken into consideration, such as paying the band, paying for the mastering of the tapes and the CD itself, artwork, promotion, distribution, wholesaler's margin, retailer's margin, VAT. I'm sure there's more, but you get the idea.

And yes - theft is theft - it's wrong whichever way you look at it. If you can't afford it, go without!
 

The Dude

Distinguished Member
If the companies 'suffering from' piracy had any understanding of market forces, piracy would have been wiped out a long time ago. The internet is 'on' all the time, in every part of the world. Yet hollywood et all insist on releasing thing at different times in different parts of the globe, and expect the 'second class' customer to sit and wait patiently, for the honour of using SW that has been available for several months elsewhere.... if they're really that stupid, then they deserve all the 'theft' that's coming to them IMO. Ironically, once piracy becomes so prevelant it really threatens the entertainment industry, (as opposed to being just some free marketing as it is at the moment), then the industry will have to implement a global release policy, across all media formats, and that action will see the only downturn in piracy we are ever likely to see. Piracy is the only way to ever beat piracy.... I'd love to be in on that meeting :)
 
L

lisa burrell

Guest
dejongj said:
That's one way of looking at it, or alternatively why do people insist on stealing things that they can't afford and then use the excuse it is too expensive....

it makes one ask a question .... have you seen my thread about taping the top 40 ................. is that stealing too? why is it any different you can theoretically tape of the radio turn it into an analogue file and put it on your i pod ...
 

mjn

Distinguished Member
lisa burrell said:
it makes one ask a question .... have you seen my thread about taping the top 40 ................. is that stealing too? why is it any different you can theoretically tape of the radio turn it into an analogue file and put it on your i pod ...
I believe it is stealing, in the law's eyes, the same as recording from the TV, and keeping the tape for ever.
 

The Dude

Distinguished Member
but philosophically speaking..... if you 'steal' something which you were never ever going to pay for anyway, then nobody has actually lost anything, so there cannot have been any actual theft? ;)
 

GW43

Well-known Member
The Dude said:
but philosophically speaking..... if you 'steal' something which you were never ever going to pay for anyway, then nobody has actually lost anything, so there cannot have been any actual theft? ;)


I'm not sure I follow your argument here. Intellectual property is not something physical that can be "lost" - but it could be copied an infinite number of times, so you could still have the original IP, but everyone else could have an identical copy, thereby reducing it's value, and creating a loss.
 
The Dude said:
but philosophically speaking..... if you 'steal' something which you were never ever going to pay for anyway, then nobody has actually lost anything, so there cannot have been any actual theft? ;)
:D I somewhere in there you've got a point, though I am quite confident that the people selling it wouldn't look at it that way, and I am also quite confident that you know it yourself that it is just a clever way with words....
 

Astraeus

Well-known Member
The Dude said:
but philosophically speaking..... if you 'steal' something which you were never ever going to pay for anyway, then nobody has actually lost anything, so there cannot have been any actual theft? ;)
That's my new alibi. ;)
 
lisa burrell said:
dejongj said:
That's one way of looking at it, or alternatively why do people insist on stealing things that they can't afford and then use the excuse it is too expensive....

it makes one ask a question .... have you seen my thread about taping the top 40 ................. is that stealing too? why is it any different you can theoretically tape of the radio turn it into an analogue file and put it on your i pod ...
Lisa, I think that is a totally different question as there is added an element of not being able to buy it even if you were willing to pay for it....Which is a whole different slant compared to this thread where people can buy it, but are not willing to spend the money on it.....

Personally I think if the item is up for sale, but you don't have the money to buy it and thus you download it...Is pure legal and morally theft....

But even if the item is not for sale, and the only way to get it is illegally downloading it is legal and morally theft....I mean I would love the nachtwacht by Rembrand but they won't sell it to me, so should I just go out and steal it instead? No that is not right.....And I'm confident you know it is not right....
 

The Dude

Distinguished Member
Problem is, (and this is the one bit hollywood has got right IMO) is that words like theft, steal, and pirate conjure up very misleading images...

I'm actually quite serious dejongj..... intellectual property opens up a whole new definition of 'theft' in my eyes... If no 'thing' has been stolen (only copied), then no actual monies have been 'lost', and there can't have actually been a theft?



:lesson:
You buy yourself a new garden gnome from B&Q. I like the gnome so much, that I ask to borrow yours, and make myself a perfect copy using my own tools, materials, and skills.

I have a prefect copy of a gnome which is on sale just around the corner. Exactly how much money have I 'stolen' from B&Q? :confused:

-Or alternatively, how much should you pay B&Q in damages, for providing me with a parrot and a wooden leg? :D
 

Downinja

Well-known Member
Back to the two at the top they say all the friends families have shelves full of downloaded and copied films
They can't be that poor otherwise they would have figured out a way to do it without burning them :D
 
The Dude said:
Problem is, (and this is the one bit hollywood has got right IMO) is that words like theft, steal, and pirate conjure up very misleading images...

I'm actually quite serious dejongj..... intellectual property opens up a whole new definition of 'theft' in my eyes... If no 'thing' has been stolen (only copied), then no actual monies have been 'lost', and there can't have actually been a theft?



:lesson:
You buy yourself a new garden gnome from B&Q. I like the gnome so much, that I ask to borrow yours, and make myself a perfect copy using my own tools, materials, and skills.

I have a prefect copy of a gnome which is on sale just around the corner. Exactly how much money have I 'stolen' from B&Q? :confused:

-Or alternatively, how much should you pay B&Q in damages, for providing me with a parrot and a wooden leg? :D
You are going a little bit to legal on me...From a commonsense perspective if you make a copy of someone else Intelectual Property without having permission that is still theft....Whether you get caught and whether B&Q can be bothered to do something about it is a whole different question...The act stays the same though...Normally people would get interested in becomming protective about their copyright if people start making money on the back of it, or when the theft becomes too big....I mean a certain amount of theft is part of doing business but that doesn't make theft right....
 

GW43

Well-known Member
The Dude said:
Problem is, (and this is the one bit hollywood has got right IMO) is that words like theft, steal, and pirate conjure up very misleading images...

I'm actually quite serious dejongj..... intellectual property opens up a whole new definition of 'theft' in my eyes... If no 'thing' has been stolen (only copied), then no actual monies have been 'lost', and there can't have actually been a theft?



:lesson:
You buy yourself a new garden gnome from B&Q. I like the gnome so much, that I ask to borrow yours, and make myself a perfect copy using my own tools, materials, and skills.

I have a prefect copy of a gnome which is on sale just around the corner. Exactly how much money have I 'stolen' from B&Q? :confused:

-Or alternatively, how much should you pay B&Q in damages, for providing me with a parrot and a wooden leg? :D



Take it to the other extreme: a band release a CD, sell one copy to someone who makes an infinite number of copies and distributes them, so the band sells only the one copy.

Same band has a gig - sells one ticket that is then copied and distributed to 2,000 people, and the band only sell the one original ticket.

Is that fair as well?
 

The Dude

Distinguished Member
Agreed tp a point dejongj, but, once more: if I make myself a copy of something which I would never have paid you for, and you therefore have lost nothing, how can I have stolen from you?

People copying and selling DVDs is theft, on the grounds of copyright...

ie they would be selling a 'fake' of an original product, and thereby depriving the manufacturer/retailer of the original, of valuable sales.... THEFT, definitely.


To me at least, For somebody downloading to be guilty of theft, the copyright holder would have to prove that the person downloading 'would have bought the product, if the copy wasn't available'

- which they cannot, and never will, be able to prove..... unless Tom Cruise gets involved, which may well happen as he is on $70m per movie apparently.. ;)
 

The Dude

Distinguished Member
Same band has a gig - sells one ticket that is then copied and distributed to 2,000 people, and the band only sell the one original ticket.

Is that fair as well?

If only 1 person wanted to pay to watch the band, then yes, they should definitely be letting people in for free :rotfl:
 
The Dude said:
Agreed tp a point dejongj, but, once more: if I make myself a copy of something which I would never have paid you for, and you therefore have lost nothing, how can I have stolen from you?
If you would never have paid for it, then why do you want it?? Just because you would not have bought it doesn't mean I would want to give it away for free...And if I did, in the case of the one paying customer of the band, it should be my decision not yours....

It almost sound like if you steel something from me, and I don't miss it or are not bothered by it, it is not really stealing....Well I beg to differ....

It all sounds a bit like the argument squaters were using for their housing....
 

sjackson

Well-known Member
on a slightly different note.

I know a lot of people who download music, myself included, and when they come across an album they like, they will then buy the album.

For example "The Go! Team" or "Arcade Fire". I'd never heard of these bands before and someone recommended them to me. I can't afford to go and buy every album that a mate recommends, so I trial them. If I think it's good, then fair enough the artist (rather the record company) deserves the purchase.

I do download some TV shows also, and more often times than not, I end up buying the DVD box set for the better quality and 5.1 sound. The way I see it, I pay my subscription to NTL, so I should be able to watch programs when I want, not when Sky One or whoever decides is the best time for me to watch them, whether that be 6 months ahead of British screenings or not.
 

Duncan G

Well-known Member
The Dude said:
Agreed tp a point dejongj, but, once more: if I make myself a copy of something which I would never have paid you for, and you therefore have lost nothing, how can I have stolen from you?

People copying and selling DVDs is theft, on the grounds of copyright...

ie they would be selling a 'fake' of an original product, and thereby depriving the manufacturer/retailer of the original, of valuable sales.... THEFT, definitely.


To me at least, For somebody downloading to be guilty of theft, the copyright holder would have to prove that the person downloading 'would have bought the product, if the copy wasn't available'

- which they cannot, and never will, be able to prove..... unless Tom Cruise gets involved, which may well happen as he is on $70m per movie apparently.. ;)

You wanted the item but could not be bothered to buy it so instead you copy it. You deprive the seller of the money you did not spend.

You clearly wanted the item otherwise you would not have copied it. The fact you have the item copied shows the intent to deprive the owner of their right to finacial gain.
 

The Dude

Distinguished Member
It's an argument that goes over most people's heads, due mainly to the fact that their sense of moral superiority has been aroused by use of the word 'theft'..... lawyers are very clever like that.. :D

Squatting in somebody's house is quite different to building one just like it, isn't it. ;)
 

The Dude

Distinguished Member
Duncan G said:
You wanted the item but could not be bothered to buy it so instead you copy it. You deprive the seller of the money you did not spend.
If that is theft then I sure hope Enzo Ferrari isn't reading this thread! :rolleyes:



Duncan G said:
You clearly wanted the item otherwise you would not have copied it. The fact you have the item copied shows the intent to deprive the owner of their right to finacial gain.
Sure I wanted it, I wanted it more than any gnome I'd ever seen, but would have never bought one at the rip-off price B&Q were charging for a lump of concrete with ears. ;)


Is it only me who sees how farcical this 'theft' mentality is?
So Hollywood can see into the future now? Tom, are you there Tom? :D
 
The Dude said:
Squatting in somebody's house is quite different to building one just like it, isn't it. ;)
Physically yes, it is very different...Though if you are the architect of that house you wouldn't think that, you would want to be paid for your design....

I've got to admit that the argument indeed goes over my head....I hear what you are saying, but besides a play on words I can't see any argument in it....
 

Similar threads

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Samsung HW-Q950T Soundbar Review, Filmmaker Mode, Disney+ $30 for Mulan, AV news and more

Latest News

John Williams' iconic movie themes get Dolby Atmos treatment
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
NAD launches T 758 V3i surround sound receiver
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Sky unveils next tranche of HDR content
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Acoustic Energy launches AE520 flagship speakers
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Disney drops all 20th Century Fox branding
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom