Copying Is Not Theft -- remixed (jazz)

[LongcatFandubers]

thanks for the men instrumental, I'm going to take to make the song in Spanish latino and make all appropriate credits, really took a long time trying to interpret this theme ...... thank you very much for everything ... Greetings from Santiago de Chile

[crazydudetz]

This is kind of creepy

[ryancfcsas]

I suppose the copyright authorities are chasing those who record using Sky+ here in the UK or TIVO in the US?  They're not?

[WattyTV]

People have been copying since long before the advent of the internet, cassette tape, or even the printing press. Each time it has been claimed the advent of new technology would destroy the living of creators, yet each time these claims have been unfounded. RIAA and MPAA are just taking their cases to the extreme.

I personally respect the wishes of copyright holders and buy their music, but also support more local and Creative Commons licensed music.

[AwkwardArmadillo]

This is kinda false, though you are not stealing directly, your still allowing someone to obtain ownership of a product that was for sale and not for free. Plus it shouldn't seem fair for to YOU if you had to buy it and they didn't. Losing potential buyers is technically stealing, your getting something for free that should have been purchased. There's no law against letting someone borrow something (for now) and that's a good alternative.

[AwookieGaming]

The corporations who condemn copying and just greedy pigs who want more money. If games like CoD were 30$ each to pay the artist, thats fair. But if its 60$ just to give more cash to the greedy publishing is unfair. 

[vspqbd]

Problem IP-fags? *trollface*

[onelineproof]

If you think about it, the main reason why the rich stay rich and poor stay poor, is because the rich own things that can't be copied or for which there are strong copyrights. So it is not skill or abilities, as should be in a competitive and efficient market, but inheritance of these kinds of goods. This makes you question whether things such as land or oil should be left to private hands.

[joelharkes]

lets copy money!!!! (u know what i mean ;)

[SabStudiosMusic]

everyone who obtains intellectual property without proper means of payment should rot in hell because they are aiding in the loss of THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN JOBS..... this is not the democracy America is supposed to be...where we hurt fellow citizens livelihoods by being ignorant to the fact that intellectual property creation is a job and without being subsizdized one way or another will hurt OUR CULTURAL CAPITAL and that CC my friends, is WHAT MAKES AMERICA GREAT

[RupeeClock]

Nice idea, but you can't just copy physical things.

[WattyTV]

@RupeeClock We're getting very close with the increasing resolution of  3-D printing ;)

[RupeeClock]

@WattyTV That's true, 3D printing can make usable replicas of actual things after scanning.

It's made a working wrench, but I doubt it could reproduce a bicycle.

[WattyTV]

@RupeeClock I dunno... we're certainly at the stage a majority of a bicycle's components could be manufactured, at least at one of the professional 3-D printing companies. Itd only be a matter of time until the resolution is high enough and the costs are low enough for it to be feasible to create something like a bike, or at least all the components needed for one. It'll be interesting to see where copyright law goes when we get to that point.

[RupeeClock]

@WattyTV Still, would it be affordable to produce bicycles that way?

To reproduce a physical copy of something takes manufacturing and material costs, copying data costs nothing.

My main concern really is the rubber of the tires, which give the flexibility and traction needed for good movement.

[pwnRonaldopwn]

This video is a good example to what pirates use as an excuse. If 10,000 people downloaded Ushers album, he will lose 10,000 potential buyers. Therefore, he also loses money.

[TheGrownUpAdult]

Yaaaaay! :D

[MrGlies]

She didn't STEAL her voice to play it multiple times over itself, she COPIED it and it made the song better. Making something that you have available for others to copy is called sharing, and that is NOT stealing either. It's an unselfish act.

[vikeyev1]

that was pretty good bro, nice work.

[TVPchallenge]

LMFAO This video is awesome.

[SergioOctubrePremium]

hey how i can have the instrumental for singning in spanish?

can you share with me the karaoke?

[szabo23]

@SergioOctubrePremium

Sure, no problem. I just added the link in the information box.

[POVEDASproductions]

litsen you ignorants cpy is not bad because silly people like you will always think copy is bad thats all

IGNORANS THAT THINK THAT AMERICA IS A COUNTRY AND NOT A CONTINENT

[Eikus89]

@Goliathvv If I allow the slaves to be free, I have to do all the work for myself! That does not justify slavery though, and YOUR argument does not justify IP. Forcing someone to limit his usage of his own (material) property is coercion. Coercion is bad, mkay? Also, (assuming you're American) the Fed constantly copies your money, but I don't hear you complaining about that.

[Goliathvv]

How about I give you a copy of a game I made and you give me a copy of the money you have?

I understand the idea behind the video and kinda agree with it, but if I allow people to copy the games I make without paying for it, the bills won't stop coming but the money will. So unless someone can give me a good solution for this situation, I still find it hard to allways support copying.

And yes, sometimes when you copy someone ends losing. It's not a neutral/win situation, it'sa lose/win one.

[UnluckyGambler]

i wonder if nina paley is in the zeitgeist movement ;]

the venus project ftw!!! ;D

[UnluckyGambler]

this is my fav version ;D

[autonomous2010]

Yeah!!

Now I am going to COPY $1,000 worth of software!

I might even get a COPY of windows 7 from a friend just for the heck of it!

Its not stealing if I COPY it!

[xxTaKe2xx]

good cover

[Sojyne]

COPYPASTA

[MaQy]

Copying is stealing the time invested in a product (music, software... whatever). This video might be very cute, but it's hiding the truth.

[cindytg87]

Only in a world where time is money, and that is the problem. Not the harmless copying of a bunch of 0's and 1's.

If games were open source you wouldn't need to pay the people to develop them.

[MaQy]

@cindytg87 In this world people need to eat, have a house or even pay the same Internet connection you are using. People need money, like it or not. I'm a programmer and I would love spending my whole life developing Open Source applications for free, but I cannot afford that. Appart from that, if you work, for instance, in a bank or a hospital, you get paid every month. Why a programmer (or an artist) can't have a salary just because his work is easy to copy? The time he/she spent has no value?

[MaQy]

@cindytg87 In response to your second statement: there are dozens of people involved in the development of a big game: programmers (graphics, AI, gameplay, online, UI, ...), character designers, level designers, gameplay designers, sound engineers, artists, musicians, producers, testers, writers, translators, actors... should all this people do their work for free? In my opinion, that's a crazy thought. That would be great in an ideal world, but in the real world they have to pay their bills.

[jaxn21]

@MaQy you are using a corrupt brain if this is truly how you feel about copying. The time invested should be because the developers and programmers love what they do...not to get rich. if all the developers thought like you there wouldnt be a market to begin with...people who realize OPEN SOURCE file SHARING is completely within the guidelines of all legal aspects, do so for the passion of technological development for mankind, not the bank. The truth is that people like you steal the passion

[MaQy]

@jaxn21 You shouldn't judge me because you don't know me. I love Open Source, I use applications like Firefox, Gimp, Thunderbird, Audacity, Amarok... I also use Kubuntu and even my mobile phone has Maemo. However, you should know that the big companies are the ones that pay many of those applications: Google, Intel, IBM... there's no way Open Source can survive without money. Don't mix two concepts, because in this case free doesn't mean "no cost at all". Developers need to get paid.

[jaxn21]

@MaQy Wrong again. I'll explain... In order for your statement of "money has to exist, like it or not" to be true, than it is also contridictive to what we know to be one of the most successful civilizations in our history...Native Americans or First Peoples as most would prefer. How is it that they could become the most successful civilization...without money? How is it that because YOU depreciate YOUR work, that money needs to be attached? Money was created by white europeans to controlthepoor

[MaQy]

@jaxn21 I didn't say money HAS to exist. I did say money exist, in our real world, so if you want to survive in this world, you need money. If I work in a software company, or as a singer, or writer... whatever, and you STEAL my work, I don't get paid, so I can't live in this world or I have to find a new job. I did not say I like this situation, I only said that's how the things work these days. We can try to change people's attitude, but you can force anyone and abuse his rights.

[jaxn21]

Riddle me this Batman....suppose the big companies were in a better world that they no longer had to pay for their resources....where would your money be then? and if this is surreal or farfetch'd to you, then I would VERY highly recommend you educate yourself on how the economy works before you try to disprove someone who already has.

[MaQy]

@jaxn21 I would love living in such world as much as you do, but look around. You are very idealistic but the humans are selfish and you can't trust everyone, that's why Comunism or Anarchy will never be acomplished. In fact, any communist country is/was actually a dictatorship. I do believe democracy is the only feasible way of coexistence. We have to improve this system, but people will always have to exchange things. Money is only a tool, probably not the best, just the one we are using now.

[jaxn21]

@MaQy see you keep saying you have seen the videos and you have done the research and you would love to live in a world like that but you REFUSE to make a small change towards changing "how things are." and you said, "People need money, like it or not." that is as far from the truth as it could be. people dont need money...money needs people. if people like you realized that and just did things for the passion money wouldnt be an issue. agreeing with the solution and being involved are different

[MaQy]

@jaxn21 Are you actually reading what I'm saying? I love Open Source, in fact I'm currently working on an open source game just for fun, but I have to do that in my free time because I NEED a job. Yes, I do need money because I have to pay my house, my clothes, my food, my PC... and you too. I do what I can promoting and contributing to open source, but I also live in a real world. Finally, my point is: by stealing the work of others you are not contributing to anything, you are just stealing.

[autonomous2010]

@MaQy Open Source is fine and all being a linux user myself.

However, Programmers have to eat too.

Its expensive to survive.

I make small scale commercial games in Java and C++ and I would love to go open source but lets be honest, Its not practical.

[MaQy]

@autonomous2010 Are you sure you are answering me? ;)

[MonsterMozz]

@autonomous2010 OMG!!!

I didn't know Linus Torvalds had starved to death.

[autonomous2010]

@MonsterMozz Quite.

There are thousands of developers for linux that develop free open source software that could be rich making closed source software for windows.

Have you payed any attention to how much new games or software costs these days?

There is a very good reason why so many programmers develop on windows. Its all about the money.

[MonsterMozz]

@autonomous2010 I've been a developer on many platforms for decades, i've yet to see a hungry one. Thin ones are rare enough.

[autonomous2010]

@MonsterMozz Well now you know one.

I used to develop for linux (C++) until I realized there was no monetary value in it.

So you are saying you know a lot of Fat Programmers? I know a lot of programmers and I assure you, none of them are even close to fat.

The exception being one guy but his case has nothing to do with programming. He was fat before he became a programmer.

[jaxn21]

you should look into these for further educating yourself(all dot-com sites) thezeitgeistmovement / thevenusproject / zeitgeistmediaproject, or you can simply google where does money come from?

[MaQy]

@jaxn21 Again, you don't know me and you are totally wrong about me: I've seen several movies of this kind and I totally agree this world sucks in many aspects. However, what I'm trying to explain it's that, first of all, we need to be fair if we want to convince others to change. It's my right to share my work with other, but it's also my right wanting to be paid for it. Just think in all the people I said that usually works in a videogame, did you ask their opinion? That's not democracy.

[garycalgary]

the FBI should come out with a cute video like this one

[goqwertygo]

stumbling on some of the most random stuff is fun

[djlatino101]

This is the FBI saying that you have copied this video without permission of any of us. You now are theft.

[KypiHabbo]

I have the strangest desire to copy this video and put it as my video now O.o;

IT IS A MIND VIRUS

[andru183]

it more takes from an industry that help an artist make money then take it away, ive seen all but 2 of my fav band and concerts is where they would prefer to see fans and tickets sales mean more to the act, getting sumit for free isn't morally right but support is far more morally just

[RFjunk]

epic win.

[ifopifo]

real nice! :)

[igorbsc]

corki222 says it like it is

[corki222]

To paraphrase one of the commenters below, this society disappoints me when an entire population fails to grasp the concept that a idea rendered into palpable form (like music, books and patents) has a value and IS property. Copying IS theft, in that you are depriving the creators of the value of their work, as surely as if you took someone's paycheck out of their pocket on their way home from their factory job.

[nintygaming]

Calling Copying stealing, is false and completely illogical.

Copying is just that, copying. In our illogical society of today however, if you copying your CD or DVD to your PC, its considered theft.

However, last time I checked the 10 Commandments, there was no command that said "Thou Shalt Not Copy". But then again, our government thinks they are higher than God. Oh well.

[mattisthegodofwar]

THIS IS WHY I CAN GET ALL MAH MEDIA FOR FREE

[mangere77]

I'm sure the manufacturer of the bicycle in the cartoon will be glad that making a copy of the bicycle is so easy. This will free him from the burden of actually manufacturing and selling bicycles which used to be a high-paid technical position. User-generated copying saved him just like it saved the music industry.

[nupanick]

@mangere77 That's a good point, but have you seen the music industry lately? I'm just not sure if it's worth protecting. Plus, the argument here more applies to people who wouldn't have bought the software anyway and aren't technically reducing profits from a statistical standpoint.

Personally, I think we should have radio stations pay the artist based on how much their song is requested, rather than picking songs first and telling us to like them. We might have to pay for radio then though.

[Minkiu]

This society disapoints me with the needing of videos like this to understand so simple facts. Thank these people that make this videos for plain brains who are unable to underestand the situation by theirselves

[MirceaKitsune]

Wonderful clip, and so very true. Why can't so many people see such an obvious thing, I wonder...

[Killingthefly89]

@MirceaKitsune Because this is only an argument of semantics

[tiberiusmkay]

@Killingthefly89 Again, if you don't understand what's being said, ask a teacher or your mom.

[Killingthefly89]

@tiberiusmkay I do understand what is being said, and unfortunately it is not a quality argument, it is an argument about the semantics of using the words stealing and theft.

[tiberiusmkay]

@Killingthefly89 I apologize for my earlier tone. Here is why I don't think the argument is merely semantic: Something is either theft, or it is not and the difference is important. The supreme court recognizes that infringement is not theft. I am confident that they have thought about this more than you or I. You can say that there is harm, but you can't steal something that can't be owned.

[Killingthefly89]

@tiberiusmkay No apology necessary, I'm just saying that it still an argument of semantics. Because there isn't already a word for what copyright infringement is classified as, they used stealing. This is just an argument to get it reclassified as something else.

[akane6]

Ownership is such a primitive concept!

[dadeaxra]

I you have something and you claim ownership than you should not make it available to anyone, not even for sale because once you sell it no longer belogs to you anymore it belongs to you and everyone who bought it from you and what they choose to do with it is there business.

[cognoscoall1]

I am going to copy this song, put it on i-toons and make millions.

[ChapaAVA]

Aside from all the piracy stuff.

I must say this song is super cute, especially the voices and the characters.

So catchy and fun. :)

[torqueman6]

The artist deserves to be compensated for their work. However the laws have been created to protect a dying industry. The recording industry is needed to get music to consumers like the pony express is needed to deliver mail. Paying an artist a buck or two for 15 songs is fair. Paying $15 for the same songs so the recording industry can get a cut is not free market. It is protectionist legislation that the very Republicans who say they are for free markets voted for so they can get PAC $.

[otheirony618]

This is what pirates actually believe

[sillymesilly]

Communists!!!! Not everyone has a job and makes art from hobby that takes hours and hours of your time. That should be your secondary profession.

Joker said it the best in Batman 2. If you are really good at something, you should get paid for it.

[khunag]

Of course you should. Which doesn't change the fact that copying is not theft ;) And this is a libertarian point of view, you can't get less communist than that ;)

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

You can be a libertarian who respects another's property rights absolutely.

[khunag]

And that's what I am. It's you who does not respect them. I am the owner of my body, I'm the owner of my brain. When i memorize something someone else wrote for example it becomes a part of my brain. You cannot own it.

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

I am the owner of my fist, should I punch your face? No, it's your face. It's their song, which came from THEIR brain, not yours.

Saying you memorizing it makes it no longer their property is like saying taking the cookie from my cookie jar means it's no longer my cookie.

[khunag]

Yes it came from their brain. Does your car belong to the factory it was made in?

Do you honestly think that memorizing something is like putting a physical object in a jar? ;) That's the first flaw of that example, and the second one is this - no one is takieng your cookie away, you still have it, we both have a cookie now, you lost nothing.

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

It belongs to the factory until sold.

It's like putting a physical object in a jar in that it isn't a license to declare the owner of the object to have lost their right to it.

And no, you do not in effect have your cookie. Your cookie cost an incredibly large investment, and is not profitable to produce if there are free riders slobbering on the cookie. You have some small amount of utility of the cookie left, but not enough to justify producing a cookie.

[TzitzimitChanson]

"If you are really good at something, you should get paid for it. "

I totally agree. So if you're good at writing songs or movies, you should be paid for writing songs or movies,

not for the diffusion of the result of your work, which is not what you're good at.

I'm a songwriter, I'm paid for writing when I'm sponsored, I'm paid for making concerts, so I'm paid for my work. I don't need more.

[ragnarrahl]

@TzitzimitChanson

You aren't other songwriters. You have the right to make such determinations about your songs and no one else's.

[lordaltay5]

Intellectual property cannot exist in a free market. It requires government force. It has no place in a free society.

[TheZimma]

BRILLIANT

[globbo100]

Let the free market determine which copy of a song,story, idea, etc. is superior to another.Free people living in a free society need more choices, not less. Intellectual Property rights in the form of copyright laws and government issued patents rob people of those very choices.

[DENNNNIS1]

Copyright, a greed of the past!

[ArkBlitz]

So be it, brother, so be it.

[MFawzyLinux]

Really, nice video :D Copying is realllllly good for sack of sharing as long as the the author permits it :D ! but the vedio is realllllly good I liked it ! the animation, the song the music and everything :)

[Osillius]

How do you determine the "value" of the original idea, and to whom should it be valuable? Tthe person that developed the idea is going to see value as monetary while recipients of the idea will see value as usefulness.

Saying that copying doesn't degrade the value of an idea is very one-sided.

[ytafromonkey0]

The issue's really very simple, the only thing that confuses people is the continued ideas->physical property metaphor. Thinking of ideas like physical property is a terrible metaphor, and one of the places this becomes most obvious is the issue of copying. You can tell the people who are falling into this thought trap by their use of the metaphor in their language, with words like theft meaning 'taking with the intent permanently to deprive', or 'owner', which don't apply to ideas

[JoyifyNichols]

It does apply to an idea if you use it to gain profit or a good grade on a paper, when someone else produced the initial labor - thinking and acting to produce the concept - and they get no credit or profit for it. That IS stealing because it deprives the other of the opportunity to have their rightful recognition (or profit) for the initial creation of a thing. It's only "simple" when you only respect your own desires and no one else's.

[DionysusAlS]

There is no such thing as intellectual property in a free market. People have been brainwashed to believe that intellectual property is a valid form of property. Intellectual property cannot be enforced without a government. Therefore, it isn't a valid form of property. Copying an idea does not damage the original. That is completely different than tangible property. If you steal my car, I can say "WTF? Where is my car?" If you copy an idea, the original holds its value.

[RPGMusicDotOrg]

@DionysusAlS This is 100% true. All copyrights and patents are nothing more than government issued monopoly licensed backed by force. They have no place in a free society.

[greenops]

@DionysusAlS I agree, but to an extent, If i come up with an everlasting light bulb, and then you go and sell the idea to a company, then my idea has just lost its value. That company now owns the rights to the everlasting light bulb.

[ReligionOfNice]

Theives who violate copyright in fact use other peoples property without their permission. The copying process itself for software and ebooks is so cheap that the value added by copying is essentially zero. When you copy onto a CD all you contribute is the 15 cents the CD cost. The rest of the value is all due to the other factor of production, the original CD. Since you didn't own the right to copy the CD you are violating the property right of the copyright holder.

[vexorism]

CD? What is that again? How can somebody claim to "own" something that does not exist? Sure, if you create something that consists merely of information (in other words numbers, data), you are the creator of it (and deserve the creds) , but you are not the owner. I mean, owner of what exactly? The idea? How the hell can somebody own an idea? Because that is what intellectual property is about... I know it's expensive for people to create music and such, but it's their choice, right?

[Riboshom]

The idea of copying stuff to give it to your friends is good...

...until you introduce Peer3Peer.

That's really what mess up the whole equation...

[thejapanesechallenge]

Copying does not "steal" the original because we're talking about things that do not act or behave in ways that objects do. The bicycle analogy doesn't work because that's a physical object, whereas we are talking about software and/or media.

When you copy media/software without permission, you are violating copyright law. If you copy it for yourself, or send a copy to someone else without permission, it qualifies as infringement of copyright. It is indeed against the law.

[7shortofperfection]

Ummmm, I don't think anyone said it was legal, I think the point is that it should be. Bet I can find a few laws on the books that you wouldn't agree with.

[ReligionOfNice]

This videos argument rests on the existence of magic. You can't just grab someone's bike while they are riding it to make a copy. You have to get physical possession of the bike in order to copy it precisely. Once you grab physical possession without permission you are in fact stealing. Even if you return it after you stole to copy it.

Preventing unauthorized copying via contract or via legal conventions is perfectly reasonable, and in order to copy you violate property rights.

[tiberiusmkay]

@ReligionOfNice Are you saying that playing a CD on your computer is stealing?

[brandonwray71]

copying is theft imagine if you were an artist or a writer or a publishing company and ppl were copying your work. The free market would either drive down prices or drive up prices based upon the supply and demand of the item produced and if government would not intervein like it has in electronics prices would surely fall. but copying or plagerizing is not fair to the artists who orginally create their material. ppl try to put yourself in other ppl's shoes.

[thebagmanmiidaj]

Plagiarising is fraud and therefore should be illegal, or at least discouraged in some fashion. However, copying is not theft. Copying is merely copying. Big deal if prices fall, this would be great news for the consumer who would no longer have to pay a mark-up of 1000%, just because some government entity decided to grant an individual or a firm a monopoly on a particular idea.

[ragnarrahl]

"Big deal if prices fall, this would be great news for the consumer who would no longer have to pay a mark-up of 1000%,"

No, it would be terrible news to the consumer when there would never be another freaking penny invested in research and development.

[khunag]

o rly? so explain to me why Windows sucks and Linux rocks ;) People will never stop doing things they're passionate about just because they won't earn lots of money, I know I won't.

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

Somehow the average consumer disagrees that Windows sucks, at least for what they need.

Besides, there are a limited number of people willing to put out such efforts for free. Nonprofits exist,but people still need money, and it's a lot easier to find things in a market in which both options exist.

Incidentally, how much is invested in Linux? Not much in terms of money. Loads in man hours I'm sure, and occasionally you get lucky, but not often.

[khunag]

Average consumer doesn't need to agree, Linux is there and can do everything Windows can, that's a fact.

"how much is invested in Linux? Not much"

My point exactly.

"there are a limited number of people willing to put out such efforts for free."

Yep, only people who love making music would make it and so on. The world would be a much nicer and more honest place :)

And you're saying "people still need money". Sure, but they would need a lot less in a world without copyrights.

[khunag]

Not to mention the fact that corporations couldn't buy out all the inconvenient inventions anymore and technological progress would be incredible.

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

How in the hell is technological progress "incredible" when it all of a sudden has zero profit whatsoever? Unlike Linux, many inventions do cost money to invent.

[khunag]

And you can still profit when you sell it. The finished product, not the idea. You cannot own an idea.

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

Ownership is based on creation. If you create an idea, yes, you can own it.

And no, you can't profit if you spend millions to develop an idea and any fool can just copy it without spending any of that development money. They can profit (until you realize you're their bitch in this economy and stop developing things) but you can't, other things equal it is absurd and impossible to compete under such a model.

[khunag]

No you cannot own an idea. End of story.

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

On what theory of ownership do you base this?

[khunag]

It's not a theory, it's a fact of life :)

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

Translation: You don't have a theory of property you're willing to show me.

Property isn't something you perceive. Making statements about it without reference to an abstract theory is impossible.

[khunag]

There's a beautiful thing called "common sense", I recommend it ^^

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

Common sense translates to "I wish to weasel out of having to rationally defend my statement."

[khunag]

qq more ^^

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

If that were the case no one would buy Windows.

Probably a distribution issue.

"

And you're saying "people still need money". Sure, but they would need a lot less in a world without copyrights. "

That's utter nonsense. Most people's expenses have a rather low share of paying for copyrights. And the people who invest their time in things-- including people who love it but can only invest that much in a profession-- need money.

[khunag]

So you're saying to me that it's cheaper to buy a movie than to download it from the internet? :) That's some f'd up logic you got there ^^

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

You said a lot. How much of your income is movies?

It's cheapest yet when there are no movies worth downloading-- which is very nearly the result of an abolition of copyright.

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

In other words, the easiest way to prove your point by NON anecdote would be to boycott all goods that have patents or copyrights and still show you are satisfied with that result. Since the people who bothered to get such things clearly ARE motivated thereby, especially if they bother to enforce them,

[khunag]

OR I could just continue not paying for ones and zeros ;) I don't feel a need to boycott anything.

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

In other words you want to take what they've created without providing the terms under which they've created it for.

[khunag]

Oh, the guilt is overwhelming ;) Maybe you should watch the video one more time to understand I'm not actually taking anything from anyone.

[ragnarrahl]

@khunag

Yes, you are. They created the medium based on the assumption that the market would pay for it. Now, if no one wants it they took it from themselves-- but if people want it and simply take the content without paying for it, it is those people who took the time invested in creating the content.

[7shortofperfection]

I would like to point out that I respect those who work on linux and make it better and more accessible way more than I respect the makers of windows. Head over to a linux forum and see how much recognition the people that actually code this stuff get. Just sayin.

[ragnarrahl]

@7shortofperfection

Are you saying they get a lot of recognition or not? I dunno which and it doesn't really matter if I don't use linux :P.

[Jaromatic]

Now that is one great version! 5*

[szabo23]

Much appreciated -- thank you!

[ReligionOfNice]

The argument presented by the video is bullshit. Ownership means complete control over how an object is used, which includes copying. When you copy an object you are using it as a factor of production. If you don't have the owners permission to use it in that fashion then you are violating his property rights.

One can retain partial property rights in an object, think mineral rights, and therefore co-own an object. Books are co-owned. The author owns the right to copy.

[ReligionOfNice]

Once you have used someone elses property as a factor of production in the creation of an object then there is a question of ownership in the new object. Sure the thief has provided his own raw materials but the copy also has characteristics derived from the stolen object. If someone steals a mold and uses his own plastic to inject into the mold the resulting objects value due to the plastic is the same as the pile of raw plastic beads, most of the value is due to the mold.

[aika092]

You sir, have won a copy of the internet.

[szabo23]

@aika092

Why, thank you! I always wanted one of those.

[dmio2]

good stuff

[szabo23]

Hey Dan -- thanks!!

[ArkBlitz]

The best-fitting version I've heard until now! Faved and starred right away!

PS: The original maker liked it too!

[szabo23]

Cool! Thanks!

[NinaPaley]

I like this! Please keep trying to make it a video response to CINT - I'm not sure how you do that, but there's nothing I can see in my account that'll make it show up.

[szabo23]

Great! Glad you like it!

And it now seems to have successfully attached itself as a video response. I guess it just took some time to process.