Copying Is Not Theft

[comuuniddelectro]

original s better ^^

[Nannirk]

@ollie1999tx Tell that to the hundreds of people who got sued over downloading The Hurtlocker.

Or that one woman in the states who got sued for millions over 24 mp3's.

I don't think I'm a retard for knowing that can happen.

[Psquit]

@Nannirk dowloading not for copying

[Nannirk]

@Psquit Downloading IS copying.

[leldoryn]

I love how the legalist fucks actually think we're advocating for illegal actions right here on Youtube. This is a satire of intellectual property laws, trying to show how they are unjust and should be done away with.

[Bonecrusherdl]

:D geil

[MrShotgunJake]

Yeah, basically I don't give a shit about what I pirate.

I really don't. and anyone with any logic would believe me to some extent.

I don't pirate everything, and I don't buy everything. I just do whatever the hell I please.

So, yes. I don't give a crap.

[festia]

Could not agree more.

[Mauccampos]

LOL! =D

Let the downloads free!

[Nannirk]

It's a shame some groups will see this as an attempt to legitimize illegal copying.

But a fun song nonetheless.

[roguelettuce]

@Nannirk It *is* an attempt to legitimise illegal copying. The QuestionCopyright site quite clearly opposes copyright controls that make filesharing/etc illegal...

[Nannirk]

@roguelettuce I don't know about that website, but the first time I saw one of these, it was about Creative Commons I think.

And it makes fun of the definition of theft not fitting downloading.

I don't think this animation is an attempt to legitimise illegal copying though.

If you slap a Creative Commons logo on the stuff you publish, Copyright still applies. It just means you want someone else to use your work.

[Nannirk]

@roguelettuce "Our mission is to educate the public about the history of copyright, and to promote methods of distribution that do not depend on restricting people from making copies."

That doesn't sound like legitimising illegal copying to me.

[roguelettuce]

@Nannirk It does to me. If you say that the current rules are too restrictive, you are saying that some people are doing things that are illegal but shouldn't be. And if you're saying an action shouldn't be illegal, then you're legitimising the action (in a certain sense of 'legitimising)..

[Nannirk]

@roguelettuce Well, if you stretch it to that sense, then yeah. But it doesn't mean they condone breaking the law.

I don't condone breaking the law, but some laws are stupid, and some laws just need to change a little. Sometimes, just the interpretation of the law needs to change. Copyright laws (at least US laws) don't serve the artists as much as the big corporations who publish them.

If you read the article "Misinterpreting Copyright" on the GNU website, you'll understand what I mean.

[DeraJa]

@Nannirk Fuck the state's law. I don't care about the opinions of a police officer or congress man on how I should act. That is all law is. The opinions of bureaucrat backed up by force. My only concern is that my actions and ideas align with what I believe is moral and just. When the internet makes copying so easy, I refuse to tolerate any form of intellectual property rights, which can be overcome through technology.

[Nannirk]

@DeraJa I don't care about copyright laws either, but I still try to obey them the way they were originally intended. I don't think it's ok to just take things that usually cost money. Unless that is literally the only way to get it. But I don't think it's morally wrong to borrow a dvd from a friend and burn it for myself, or downloading a song I really like by a band I really like. I just don't do it because I don't want to get sued into poverty.

[gogolito]

Extra!!!

[RastaYoMama]

THAT was awesome, good job

[Patrick1176]

LMAO