 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (3)Bremzen dariusgriffin belb ...and 377 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614103 Today 0 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Copyright theft is punishable under the law, and can hold a prison term and/or a fine. Physical item theft is punishable under the law, and can hold a prison term and/or a fine. As far as I'm concerned, they are both as unlawful as the other, and since they both hold the same consequences they are both a real crime |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
For heaven's sake - I'll repeat since I was ignored: Who said copyright violation wasn't a real crime? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"That's a false analogy. You can't equate physical theft with copyright violation." ok i understand that you didn't say that it wasn't a real crime, but could you please clarify this statement? I'm sorry I'm being a dumbass, but I'd really appreciate some enlightenment from you on this statement :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Ok , I apologise if I misinterpreted your statement...but you seem to hold copyright violation as a lesser crime to physical theft (again this could be an incorrect assumption). To me they are both one and the same. Now if you wouldn't mind answering my question which you are obviously attempting to avoid (this could be wrong, you might not be attempting to avoid it at all, in either case a reply would be appreciated). |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The point I was trying to make is that there is one action called larceny, which is codified under English common law as "a taking and carrying away of tangible personal property of another by trespass with intent to permanently deprive." Copyright violation is another totally different action and a different crime under the law (in the USA at least). That's all I'm trying to say. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
but by taking away material that you would otherwise have had to have bought (music or video) then you are still permanently depriving the creator of the money that you would have spent buying the material in question, so wouldn't it still be classed as the same thing? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Both are still theft. You are tried under different laws for armed robbery and theft with menaces...yet essentially both the same thing. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I've explained my view on the issue as clearly as I can. There are quite a lot of online resources on the subject for further reading, as you can imagine. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
bleh artists get the smallest cut of thier intellectual propertie the record company takes most of it for every cd an artist gets about £1.20 the cd itself cost 10p to manufacture including labour i have no quarms downlaoding mp3's illegally if i really like it ill go buy it as ive done with the 300 cd's in my collection. i see mp3 more as modern day radio you hear it if you like it you buy the cd. i mean theres nothing better than getting a new cd and opening out the booklet shit its one of my favourite pastimes unwrapping a new cd and reading the liner notes. as for .lac never fuking heard of it :P |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
oh one other point recording the radio is against copyright law and also theft acoording to us law felt tip pens should be out lawed for copyright violationa s the law states all materials that may aid in breaking copyright laws are illegal and as felt tip pens are used to draw round the copyright protection part of copyright protected cds they are supposed to be illegal (there was a protest to try and get them outlawed to make a point). long live grey tuesday |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Even that dictionary definition makes no distinction between physical and intellectual things it just states personal, which would cover both. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you could also say that any implement that can write or inscribe on paper should be outlawed as well, because you can transcribe a book and have your very own copy. or you could draw your own copy of the latest film, frame by frame on pages, and then use a flick book to animate them. that would only be the same as a shitly done divx copy of a film ;P |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
lol |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i felt bad posting a single lol i appologise |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the only problem with ecnadniarb's argument is that he took the car, and didn't copy it and take it, I own F**kloads of music in real life, walls stacked with cd's and a rack filled with vinyl, so yuo can't exactly call me cheap, but i also have more mp3's than a lot of people here, and everytime I d/l and album I like, I usually end up buying it, but then there's some stuff I intend on NEVER buying, I know it's against the law, but I know for a fact that most of the artists, that are the sort of people i repect in the business, are geting shit all for there work, these people aren't rock stars, they're mostly struggling musicians, happy for people to even hear their music, and I find using the mp3 revolution to find out as much as I can about soemoens music and deciding whether it's worth buying perfectly acceptable, it's only a copy of information, I'm not destroying the original and "ripping someone off" directly, becasue the fact of the matter is that I probably might not have heard of the album if I never d/l'd it and got to like it, and bought it, and the money I save NOT buying crap music I can use to support better artists, the only possible casualty here is usually the record company making the album, and the artist, and if they're heaps popular, then they should have enough money, and if they're not, chances are I wouldn't have heard of them otherwise, in the end I think it works to their favour |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Well what a bundle of laughs this thread turned out to be. I, for one, would rather preview music in flac than mp3 any day. mp3s sound crap (yes they do and I really don't give a rats fat sweaty chute if Jethro Q Normal can't tell the difference cos I canand since I'm the one listening to 'em, that's the verdict I'll go by) and flac doesn't. End of story. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
btw, have you (ie, anyone) ever tried to listen to Pan(a)sonic in mp3 on decent equipment? Boy does it sound different. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
didn't anyone realize this user is a girl? where's all the overly nice guys? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
exactly my point. listening to music that doesn't just supply mere vocals and a catchy repetitive hook means listening for particulars and soundscapes and weird odds and ends. BUT also, to repeat myself again, requesting a .flac file isn't necessarily a protest against buying actual product - the actual product has its own little unique purchasing pleasure. the funny thing is, i bet if i bought the cd, ripped it into .flac files, or mp3s at 320 kbps, and told you guys about it, someone would come along sneeking a couple of downloads. ;) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"$15 dollars? are you kidding me? i dont know what state you're from, but HERE IN CANADA the price is about $40ish" thats just cause canadian money is mostly worthless |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
flac is nice if you 1 - have the disc space 2 - dont have a portable mp3 player compresion has its limits and flac is certainly a limit apart from its portability ie massive trade off of mp3s, it has NO purpose for compatibility or use. if you compress music you are doing it for a reason, you are doing it because you dont own the original or you are a pirate who wants to spread percect rips of original cds over the internet. if you are that depserate for a cd FUCKING BUY IT! its not that hard to fork out money. you lot are a disgrace. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yes MP3's sound crap, hence why people go and buy the official release. But let's face it for every person who will go out and buy the CD there will be 100 others who will be content with their lossless copy...more than was the case with MP3's...there is no compelling reason why you should go and outlay money for exactly the same quality. Which is a pity. Personally I don't care...I will rip off as much stuff as I can. I am a scouser afterall, I have a stereotype to live up to :P |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i rip all my cds 'securly' with eac....then save them as a single .flac anc .cue....i can basically make a perfect copy of a cd from my harddrive, yes ive calculated my drives read + write offsets...... if i had ripped them all to ogg (or heaven forbid ....mp3) id be screwed in 5 years when theres better tuned/more advanced compression options....lossless is the ONLY way to go to be future friendly (screwed meaning have to re rip....no recompression for me please) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I buy as much as I can, I download as much as I can. I'm doing the best I can! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
You don't really know what you're talking about. There's a lot of exciting work being done with hardware gadgets that play flac and other lossless audio files. I have converted part of my music collection to flac (the rest are still mp3) and listen to it throughout the house with a few of . I don't use CDs at all any more except occasionally in the car. Once you flac you can't go bac. har. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
