Secret Copyright Law Reported

[tompe]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

The real question is, how many people are like me & how many enjoy working hard for no reward? You need a certain number/percentage of people working hard to support civilization. Do you think there's enough of the latter type to do that? I don't.

Why do you assume no reward? Appreciation and fame is also rewards.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Sonist

Hm, without debating the merits of The Patriot Act, you really do not see a difference between:

(a) someone downloading a "pirated" mp3, and

(b) someone specifically believed to be affiliated with a terrorist group, who is receiving communication from a foreign country, where such communication is considered a threat to national security?

...

that's not even the point. The fact that they are allowed to spy on citizens at ALL without a specific reason IS the point.

This is way too far off topic so I will not respond or post wrt the so called "Patriot Act" further.

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

I find creating things to be hard work. It's possible that some people enjoy working hard for some reason-for me, the only reason I work hard is for the reward. Take that away & you've strangled *my* creativity....

Great!

But what does this has to do with fishing internet traffic by private companies?

Or are you claiming, that without such surveillance, all artists will redirect their creativity to digging ditches?

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by zerospinboson

Have you considered that there are also people who enjoy being both (a scientist) and a writer, who would never want to be just a writer?

Sure, and for every one of those, there are dozens of people who want to emulate, say, Richard K. Morgan and write "The big one" which lets them quit their day job.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Sonist

Great!

But what does this has to do with fishing internet traffic by private companies?

Or are you claiming, that without such surveillance, all artists will redirect their creativity to digging ditches?

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

The real question is, how many people are like me & how many enjoy working hard for no reward?

The mistake is in saying that there is no reward. As I said before, for some, the work (and the sharing of it) is it's own reward.

As for how many people are willing to do that? Look to all the contributors to Wikipedia and other similar projects. Look to all the people who work on open source software (who aren't working for one of the johnny-come-lately commercial OSS developers) including a little thing called "Linux" created by just such people. Look at all the people running blogs that barely break even with ads (or even cost the site owner out of pocket) or forums with similar lack of profit. Look at the people who are bothering to do the cracking of DRM and the posting of media on-line. Look at the people doing the tedious work of fansubs and scanlations and book translations even though not only do they not get money, they don't even get recognized by name.

How many people are willing to work on things that they are interested in for no money? Millions. Millions and millions.

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by kennyc

that's not even the point. The fact that they are allowed to spy on citizens at ALL without a specific reason IS the point.

This is way too far off topic so I will not respond or post wrt the so called "Patriot Act" further.

Well, a little better understanding of The Patriot Act might show, why it relates more to the treaty being negotiated, than some simplistic musings on theft and IP.

BTW, if the powers granted by The Patriot Act were really so broad, as some here claim, why not just use them to clear out all the domestic "pirates?"

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Yep, I see that....

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

Some of us seem to have complete opposites in philosophies of life. For some, producing non-physical "stuff" (be it sounds, patterns of light, words) is a means to an ends of making money. But for others, the production and sharing of ideas and "art" is the ends itself. Those kinds of people produce things because they are passionate about it, and because they want to "give back" to society for all the great "stuff" that they enjoy.

I'm perfectly fine with seeing the end of the first group if we keep the second.

Why do so many on here(generally those advocating "file-sharing") always portray an either/or situation?

Either you create for the simple joy of creating OR you create only as a "means to an ends of making money"! There can never be an in between can there?

Sure there might be those who create simple because they enjoy creating or they want the recognition or to "give back" and would never dream of accepting any money for their efforts. And of course there may be those out there who create solely to make money.

Here's the reality though............the vast, vast majority create because they enjoy creating and at the same time they would love to make money from it!

I know, horrible to think that a creative person would sully themselve with the idea of money but there you have it! And you know what? That isn't a bad thing, it doesn't make them capitalist pigs, it doesn't lessen their creativity or cheapen their work or somehow make them or their work less worthy or noble.

Very very few people fall in one extreme or the other. I have not personally met anyone who really hates creating and only does it for the money. I have also not personally met anyone who would say no to being able to earn their primary source of income from doing what they love to do - creating.

Cheers,
PKFFW

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

Why do so many on here(generally those advocating "file-sharing") always portray an either/or situation?

It's a direct reaction to the tactics of the music majors.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

Why do so many on here(generally those advocating "file-sharing") always portray an either/or situation?

I don't necessarily think that's what they're saying. If the monetary incentive were hypothetically removed, then regardless of whether someone created for the love of the art or they did it for both the love of the art and as a way to make money, they would likely continue to create without the incentive. It's only the group of people who only are in it for the money, or at least that's their primary motivation, that would stop.

It's not necessarily that many on here are ignoring the set of people who do both, it's just that for the purpose of this hypothetical discussion the set that are in it for both and the set that do it only for the love of the art are basically the same thing.

In reality, I'm sure there are all kinds of people that fall into various places between the two extremes (80/20, 75/25, 50/50... etc). But for the discussion at hand, it overly complicates things to try and address every position that someone may fall in. It's easier to talk about it in terms of 100/0 and 0/100 with the implied understanding that it's more of a gray area in reality.

[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

.... It's only the group of people who only are in it for the money, or at least that's their primary motivation, that would stop.

(bold emphasis mine)
I disagree. I think many who love to create without thought of money would be forced to stop, or at the very least devote far less time to, their creative endeavours.

Is that a bad thing? Maybe, maybe not and could be debated ad nauseum. It is simply the reality.

Originally Posted by Shaggy

In reality, I'm sure there are all kinds of people that fall into various places between the two extremes (80/20, 75/25, 50/50... etc). But for the discussion at hand, it overly complicates things to try and address every position that someone may fall in. It's easier to talk about it in terms of 100/0 and 0/100 with the implied understanding that it's more of a gray area in reality.

Agreed, it is easier to ignore the grey.

It is also much easier for the discussion to equate every pirated download with a lost sale and every downloader as a criminal freeloader unwilling to pay for anything. Yet arguing that doesn't seem to be acceptable.

Cheers,
PKFFW

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

It is also much easier for the discussion to equate every pirated download with a lost sale and every downloader as a criminal freeloader unwilling to pay for anything. Yet arguing that doesn't seem to be acceptable.

Cheers,
PKFFW

Let me ask you this; do you really believe (all your name-calling aside) that the tide of downloading can be stopped? Do you really think that there is anything that can be done to halt these 'criminal freeloaders' as you call them? What would you do to stop it, to make sure that every download equaled a sale?

I mean it's all well and good being angry and equating downloading to theft, but I haven't heard once how you're going to stop the sea-change in our society.

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

It's a direct reaction to the tactics of the music majors.

In reality, it is mostly the content providers, who insist that this is a zero-sum game.

They are the ones, who count every illegal download as a lost sale, and they are the ones who claim, that without draconian measures like this treaty, all artists will stop creating, and civilization will collapse.

The simple fact is, that as long as the content providers insist on pricing a DRM-ed download, valid for one viewing, at prices five times higher than what Blockbuster charges for the same rental, people who don't have a Blockbuster, will be tempted to "pirate."

And, if the music industry achieves its goal of forcing per song prices upward of $2, for compressed files, iTunes and the likes will realize less sales, and "piracy" will increase.

And the same goes for DRM-ed, barely formatted $15 ebooks.

None of which justifies the dramatically increased intrusion into our use of the internet, by private entities or the government, which is proposed in this secretly negotiated treaty.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Let me ask you this; do you really believe (all your name-calling aside) that the tide of downloading can be stopped? Do you really think that there is anything that can be done to halt these 'criminal freeloaders' as you call them? What would you do to stop it, to make sure that every download equaled a sale?

I mean it's all well and good being angry and equating downloading to theft, but I haven't heard once how you're going to stop the sea-change in our society.

It starts with understanding and social change. It's not going to happen overnight and it cannot be forced, it can only be managed.

You have to encourage and allow the honest people to be honest. We must teach our children ethics instead of the current culture of 'whateveryoucangetawaywithislegal.' For the others we break out the bazookas, the rack, the iron lady....