Pirate Party Elected to EU Parliament

[farlex85]

I still don't understand how stealing movies, games and music is "moral" or whatever you're saying. What's ok with stealing?

Legally nothing.

Some things never change my friend. One thing is for sure. Whatever is decided the artist will suffer. That never changes. I just don't want to have a new slave owner. I know this ones moods all to well.



Nothing unless you rewrite what's wrong and right.

Artists will/have flourished with the internet. It's amazing all the wonderful art you can find so quickly.

believe me you won't see any compromise on this matter

I know, some people are more receptive than others. Compromises unfortunately have to sometimes be forced, and those unwilling to bend are, as I said, broken. There is always room in the middle.

 

[Shadin]

Some things never change my friend. One thing is for sure. Whatever is decided the artist will suffer. That never changes. I just don't want to have a new slave owner. I know this ones moods all to well.



Nothing unless you rewrite what's wrong and right.

This is just awful. Now record executives might have to stop buying private jets and owning multi-million dollar mansions in order to make ends meet. Maybe they'll even have to stop putting artists into a medieval form of indentured servitude as well.

If you think anything about the RIAA or MPAA is pro-artist, then you are sadly, sadly mistaken. Socking it to those executives is the best thing for artists and consumers.

 

[laszlo]

all these problem will disappear when humanity won't work and live to accumulate fortune and everyone will have free access to everything so basically the money will be mentioned in history books like the worst thing invented by homo sapiens... but we won't live enough to see it .. even our children kids won't so we're doomed to live and accept all what's going on now.

 

[TheMailMan78]

This is just awful. Now record executives might have to stop buying private jets and owning multi-million dollar mansions in order to make ends meet. Maybe they'll even have to stop putting artists into a medieval form of indentured servitude as well.

If you think anything about the RIAA or MPAA is pro-artist, then you are sadly, sadly mistaken. Socking it to those executives is the best thing for artists and consumers.

If you only knew about the industry I work it. Musicians have it easy. I would kill to have something like the RIAA or MPAA.

all these problem will disappear when humanity won't work and live to accumulate fortune and everyone will have free access to everything so basically the money will be mentioned in history books like the worst thing invented by homo sapiens... but we won't live enough to see it .. even our children kids won't so we're doomed to live and accept all what's going on now.

La, La, La, La, Elmos world.

 

[Disparia]

Whether true or not, it is a goal (the Star Trek life) that I'd like to shoot for

 

[Shadin]

If you only knew about the industry I work it. Musicians have it easy. I would kill to have something like the RIAA or MPAA.

I'm an art major myself with specializations in photography and drawing mediums (mostly graphite and charcoal). First off, the goals of this group don't really apply to those of us who work in physical mediums because with the exception of photography there's just not a lot of widespread digital distribution to the masses the way there is for music and movies. Second off, if you don't love what you do enough to not worry about this, then probably want to find something else to do.

And if you think musicians have it easy because of the RIAA, then you've read nothing in depth about the matter, and you don't know anyone trying to work in the music business.

 

[TheMailMan78]

I'm an art major myself with specializations in photography and drawing mediums (mostly graphite and charcoal). First off, the goals of this group don't really apply to those of us who work in physical mediums because with the exception of photography there's just not a lot of widespread digital distribution to the masses the way there is for music and movies. Second off, if you don't love what you do enough to not worry about this, then probably want to find something else to do.

And if you think musicians have it easy because of the RIAA, then you've read nothing in depth about the matter, and you don't know anyone trying to work in the music business.

Glad to hear it from an "art major". When you get the water from behind your ears come back and talk to me in 10 years.

 

[Solaris17]

im very intrested in seeing how this pans out. this is deffinetely a very intresting move and the things that are going or are going to be tried to change should prove an intresting feat. i congradulate them in getting a chair though.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Every computer breaks copyright laws millions/billions of times a second. Copyright laws only make sense when dealing with non-digitized data. I'm glad they succeeded but there needs to be a whole lot more where that came from.

 

[Shadin]

Glad to hear it from an "art major". When you get the water from behind your ears come back and talk to me in 10 years.

Whatever, I've been out of school for over ten years now, and have three close friends that created an upstart label working in the music industry themselves that I see first hand how antiquated the RIAA companies are and how their model is anti-artist and too top-heavy to continue existing in a digital era.

But since you're obviously not interested in researching your knee-jerk reactions, go back to worrying about how the Swedes are going to relentlessly pirate your "commercial paintings" on torrent sites. Like I said, the vast majority of this shit doesn't apply to those of us working in physical mediums.

 

[Solaris17]

Every computer breaks copyright laws millions/billions of times a second. Copyright laws only make sense when dealing with non-digitized data. I'm glad they succeeded but there needs to be a whole lot more where that came from.

i think that their intelligent enough to realize that the changing or rewriting of laws is more important and worthwhile than making torrents legal or something. im confident that their not their to try and pass or push mediocre or rediculous laws and regulations.

 

[TheMailMan78]

im very intrested in seeing how this pans out. this is deffinetely a very intresting move and the things that are going or are going to be tried to change should prove an intresting feat. i congradulate them in getting a chair though.

F$%king Solaris is back!

 

[Solaris17]

F$%king Solaris is back!

it will be on and off but more frequent and rest assured i am on the road to return

 

[TheMailMan78]

it will be on and off but more frequent and rest assured i am on the road to return

Thats what I'm talking about. Its been tough holdin' these bitches in check.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

i think that their intelligent enough to realize that the changing or rewriting of laws is more important and worthwhile than making torrents legal or something. im confident that their not their to try and pass or push mediocre or rediculous laws and regulations.

I need only cite DMCA to prove that inaccurate. DMCA was authored with only lobbying RIAA and MPAA in mind. Some exceptions were added for libraries but the act effectively took away most consumer rights (even to backing up media). There's not enough intelligence in political circles; the dollar sign makes all their decisions for them.

It will be a very long time before the laws in regards to digital copyright favor the consumer. This is only the first step in a very long journey.


By the way, Torrents are legal and so is all forms of peer to peer networking. The only thing that can be labeled illicit is the content shared. RIAA succeeded in the past in convincing a court that peer to peer has no use besides illicit activities; the only reason the RIAA won is because they got far more money than the developers of P2P technology (basically keep counter suing until the developer goes bankrupt).


Edit: Oh, by the way, current Vice President Biden played a critical role in making sure DMCA happened.

 

[btarunr]

So what is your stance on this? It's ok to steal from others?

My stance is it's not OK to steal from consumers.

It's not OK for a record company for force someone to buy a crappy album (with little or no idea about how crappy the rest of the album is other than one or two 'star' singles, with major reviewers (so called "subjective analysts") on recoding companies' payrolls, and then be restricted from doing anything but playing it or using it as a coffee-mug coaster.

It's not OK for a record company to dictate how people should consume content they paid for.

Television and radio are mass-media. Once a song/video is broadcast from the broadcaster, it's gone. There should end the recording companies' liabilities over the content. Consumers shouldn't be told not to add a 'copyrighted' piece of content from YouTube videos, if it's coming from a TV or radio recording.

There's no way you can call TV or Radio recording illegal. Doing so is blatant theft. For the logic stated above.

Penal codes around the world suck. So he illegally downloaded a .mp3 (worth 99c on Amazon), and is made to pay >10 times the amount as fine? Appalling. This is exactly what TPP is out to set right...cash-rich recoding companies with their shitty contracted artists robbing the masses blind.

 

[kyle2020]

^ talk about hitting the nail on the head, nicely said btar

 

[Solaris17]

I need only cite DMCA to prove that inaccurate. DMCA was authored with only lobbying RIAA and MPAA in mind. Some exceptions were added for libraries but the act effectively took away most consumer rights (even to backing up media). There's not enough intelligence in political circles; the dollar sign makes all their decisions for them.

It will be a very long time before the laws in regards to digital copyright favor the consumer. This is only the first step in a very long journey.


By the way, Torrents are legal and so is all forms of peer to peer networking. The only thing that can be labeled illicit is the content shared. RIAA succeeded in the past in convincing a court that peer to peer has no use besides illicit activities; the only reason the RIAA won is because they got far more money than the developers of P2P technology (basically keep counter suing until the developer goes bankrupt).


Edit: Oh, by the way, current Vice President Biden played a critical role in making sure DMCA happened.

its the beggining yes but atleast it has started. im not arguing that regulations on stealing games or w/e is wrong but i dont see how im wrong either if i have 2 laptops and a desktop i want to copy burn and move all the songs i want. if i want to rip a dvd i will. if i want a player that will play the burned backups because i dont trust my bestfriends little siswter enough to bring over the legit copy i better be able to do that. stealing something from sombody is wrong.....limiting what someone can do with a physical let me reitterate PHYSICAL peice of property they own...is also wrong.

 

[TheMailMan78]

My stance is it's not OK to steal from consumers.

It's not OK for a record company for force someone to buy a crappy album (with little or no idea about how crappy the rest of the album is other than one or two 'star' singles, with major reviewers (so called "subjective analysts") on recoding companies' payrolls, and then be restricted from doing anything but playing it or using it as a coffee-mug coaster.

It's not OK for a record company to dictate how people should consume content they paid for.

Television and radio are mass-media. Once a song/video is broadcast from the broadcaster, it's gone. There should end the recording companies' liabilities over the content. Consumers shouldn't be told not to add a 'copyrighted' piece of content from YouTube videos, if it's coming from a TV or radio recording.

There's no way you can call TV or Radio recoding illegal. Doing so is blatant theft. For the logic stated above.

Penal codes around the world suck. So he illegally downloaded a .mp3 (worth 99c on Amazon), and is made to pay >10 times the amount as fine? Appalling. This is exactly what TPP is out to set right...cash-rich recoding companies with their shitty contracted artists robbing the masses blind.

One hole in your argument. No one forces you to buy anything.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

One hole in your argument. No one forces you to buy anything.

If they win a lawsuit against you, the court forces you to pay. No, you're not "buying" anything. Just getting smacked with buying a private jet for BMG, Sony, EA, Universal, or what have you.

The exorbitant fines are a sign of the archaic copyright laws in place.

 

[kyle2020]

For example - I was accused of downloading a pirate copy of Call of Juarez - the RRP of that game is around £7. The company wanted £565. How can that be called logical?

 

[btarunr]

One hole in your argument. No one forces you to buy anything.

One in yours too. As content provider (or better still, service provider, or content 'manufacturer', whichever way you look at it), you can't rip off people.

Make one or two attractive songs, fill the rest of the CD with crap, and selling 10 songs (because only the entire album is marketed, not the hit single), is ripping off. Especially for those who don't use digital downloads, and believe in having a hard-copy of everything they buy.

 

[mdm-adph]

If you only knew about the industry I work it. Musicians have it easy. I would kill to have something like the RIAA or MPAA.

You do realize you're basically wishing for a union, right? Never thought I hear you'd say it.

That's pretty much what the RIAA and MPAA are.

I need only cite DMCA to prove that inaccurate. DMCA was authored with only lobbying RIAA and MPAA in mind. Some exceptions were added for libraries but the act effectively took away most consumer rights (even to backing up media). There's not enough intelligence in political circles; the dollar sign makes all their decisions for them.

It will be a very long time before the laws in regards to digital copyright favor the consumer. This is only the first step in a very long journey.

By the way, Torrents are legal and so is all forms of peer to peer networking. The only thing that can be labeled illicit is the content shared. RIAA succeeded in the past in convincing a court that peer to peer has no use besides illicit activities; the only reason the RIAA won is because they got far more money than the developers of P2P technology (basically keep counter suing until the developer goes bankrupt).

Edit: Oh, by the way, current Vice President Biden played a critical role in making sure DMCA happened.

And Clinton signed it into law. When it comes to digital rights, both parties in the US screw people over.

 

[TheMailMan78]

If they win a lawsuit against you, the court forces you to pay. No, you're not "buying" anything. Just getting smacked with buying a private jet for BMG, Sony, EA, Universal, or what have you.

The exorbitant fines are a sign of the archaic copyright laws in place.

Um what they do with their money is their business.

For example - I was accused of downloading a pirate copy of Call of Juarez - the RRP of that game is around £7. The company wanted £565. How can that be called logical?

Well if you did it then yeah. They should be able to fine you also. However if you didn't do it you have a case against them. You cant dissolve an institution for making false accusations. You can correct or punish them however. Everyone makes mistakes.

One in yours too. As content provider (or better still, service provider, or content 'manufacturer', whichever way you look at it), you can't rip off people.

Make one or two attractive songs, fill the rest of the CD with crap, and selling 10 songs (because only the entire album is marketed, not the hit single), is ripping off. Especially for those who don't use digital downloads, and believe in having a hard-copy of everything they buy.

How is it ripping off? Maybe Ill like the songs you don't. Just because you dont like something does not give you the right to steal what you want.

You do realize you're basically wishing for a union, right? Never thought I hear you'd say it.

That's pretty much what the RIAA and MPAA are.

Terrifying I know! You bastards better hope artists never form a real union. You think things are expensive now?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I don't think it has anything to do with parties; it is the fact there isn't severe restrictions on lobbying. If you wine and dine someone enough, they'll feel guilty not to help you out. The number of politicans watching out for special interests (producers) far exceed those watching out for the people (consumers).