Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony1988
Sheesh talk about missing the point. I will repeat it again. If someone online is using OR downloading/hosting copyrighted materials they should be liable for that use.
Now as for creative. Be as creative as you want. NO ONE is going to take that away from you. BUT dont be creative riding on the coat tails of someone elses creativity UNLESS you have permission to do so.(I am not talking about a little girl singing along with a radio) Im talking about people who have websites that use these creative propeties on their site either in design or offering them for free to others or make money off them etc. etc.....
...and once again I will repeat I am NOT for a bill that allows these media corporations to abuse it.(how many times do I have to repeat it?) These bills need to be rewritten to protect people who are not infringing on others hard work. It is irrelevant if laws have been abused in the past. Thats a weak argument IMO. Bottom line is there will be a standard eventually and you either deal with it or dont.
If you created something wildly popular. A story, Logo, music etc. Would you be willing to let others make money off it without compensation?? Or people take these items without paying the purchase price? I doubt it.
It happens all to frequently online.
Instead of people seeing these corporations as BAD and GREEDY all the time. Understand they are businesses as well and employ people. They have a bottom line as well. They have lost much money on piracy over the last 16 years.
If one thinks they ask too much for their wares. DONT purchase them. But also one shouldnt feel they have a right to it for free.
My question is. Would you be willing for an anti piracy bill that will insure coporations do not abuse it????
|
Show me a bill that corporations can't abuse I'll read it and tell you what I think. I'm something of a fan of due process and i haven't yet seen a bill that doesn't involve summery removal or blocking and then fighting it out later. I wouldn't agree to something that allowed removal without FIRST giving the opportunity to defend oneself.
You still haven't bothered to back up your arguments. What money have they lost? How much? How is it calculated? I was under the media industry has been turning in record profits.
A better question than would I be willing to allow someone to profit from something wildly popular I created would be how far would one be willing to go to stop them, what would you give up and expect others to give up? And why should I expect others to sacrifice for me profit margin?
I'll tell you the simple truth, if I wrote a book or made a movie or wrote a song that was wildly popular enough that I was making money I'd say please buy it, it'll let me try to do more cool stuff and it would suck to after all this epic have to go get a real job, please please don't make me get a real job. And then leave it at that. I wouldn't risk being forcibly silenced in exchange for the chance at a few more dollars. And there's already a process in place for civil litigation if someone made a movie based on my book song or movie and tried to release it for profit. Bonus points for that being an actual tort as opposed to going after someone who shares a torrent, going after them would just be spite. Life's too short for that crap and hell they may very well have a legitimate reason such as their legitimate copy being DRM crippled by the distributor.
You can't back up your no one will take it away from you argument. We've shown that it has been done. Claiming otherwise is just foolish. Given the power to censor someone is going to try to do it for reference see the link I posted earlier.
If you want to go after people profiting from infringement go after their bank accounts. Find the infringing material get a warrant for bank records, show the profit, show the intent to use infringing material for profit, get a judgement.