♫ Copying can be theft.♫ Stealing these things leaves less pay left. Copying doesn’t settle the score if payment’s received no more. ♫ Copying can be theft.♫ If I copy yours I pay no dues The artist or writer is feeling blue – that’s what copies can do. If I protect my content, you’ll better understand how hard we work to make the stuff that’s so high in demand! Not paying for a thing, that is what’s called “copying” Sharing content with everyone -for artists, is just no fun. ♫
Small people aren't harmed by "piracy" because it's harder to find a free download to smaller artists than it is to just pay the 1 dollar for the song. You're getting the wrong idea. It's big production companies that make millions and millions of dollars at opening day at the box office.
Copying is theft. When individuals or organizations spend money to develop products, they do so with the intention of profiting from sales. When sales are siphoned off by copying, the original developer(s) may not even have the opportunity to recoup their original investment. These lyrics are an oversimplification and a misrepresentation of the facts.
@2camjohn You'll have to substantiate that statement with some objectively verifiable numbers. In these economically difficult times, I don't see how people who have been given a ripped copy of a CD would necessarily purchase the original if they don't have to. When a pharmaceutical company spends millions to develop a product and another company copies it within the first 3 months of its release, that is profit siphoning. I'm not complicating anything. I believe you haven't studied the issue.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Black people "steal" and "bootleg". That's wrong. White people simply "copy" things. Kind of like how they didn't "steal" this country from the Native Americans. They simply "copied" deceitful business practices from other people.
EU and USA must cool down on their property rights... If it's been on for 20 years, on radio, TV, DVDs, internet... how can you claim that it is still yours?
If you want it to be 'yours' and private please keep it in a research lab vault and don't release into public.
Knowledge is public, protect your private data, but don't claim knowledge to be personal.
In other countries 'buying' is not an option, legal CDs are not in stores
I'm hoping that in the future there will be machines that copy stuff. Then I could just copy the all the candies I want from a friend who might've bought 'em and so I wouldn't have to go shopping at all anymore! We could, like, get lots of candies for our whole group by investing only a few cents to one candy and then we could copy that candy to each of us! That's ok because that's not theft!
Man, life is going to be fun and easy in the future :)
I don´t think that the point of the song was to claim that one should copy a bicycle, but rather say that there´s difference between copying and stealing.
Although I liked this counter-culture idea... but, uhh... copying IS stealing in today's society. I mean, Bicycles? Come on... bad analogy. What if I had this artwork, and someone is 'copying' it and sell it and have profit from it?
Yeah, deffinetly, we could have like dozens of bands playing this same song, and you bet I'd insist that i wrote the lyrics, not Nina Paley, and my bandmate here Jimmy wrote the music, not therockcookiebottom. Wouldn't that be nice? One for me, one for you, in fact, one for each and every one of us! Don't tell me you're so naive to believe that people are sincere and nobody would ever claim to have created something they didn't.
But the topic is another one, in fact, it's copying. If you would one day consider that you're efforts in creating music are so great that you would deserve to be paid for your work, would you like it if I would give out free ripped coppies of your work to others? What if I would in fact sell your work for a fraction of what you sell it for, making some money on account of your creations. Would you like that?
Depends on creator's will basically. If I work for yesrs on one great book or one great album and want to sell it, I deffinetly couldn't agree with selling one copy, and the world sharing it freely, me making maybe 30 dollars for years of work and practicly loosing hundreds to thousands of dollars in investment money. It gets much worse if my attempt is to live of the money that I make out of, say, music or writing.
If you do work, you don't have right to money. You don't have it even if people uses your work. If you would have, then chefs would have the right to stop people from making the same kind of food, and chess players could stop people from imitating their playing style, and everyone who would come up wth a new method of doing something could stop everyone from uusing that method without payment. It would be very bad for the community.
[If you do work, you don't have right to money. You don't have it even if people uses your work.]
What? Excuse me? I thought we were having a serious conversation here, among adulds. I now seriously disregard you for that statement. If you're indeed a 13 year old, why don't you go talk about Pokemon or something? Geez... the people these days...
If you for example would make up a new recipe, and someone uses it - no, you don't have right to money. If you would go out and dig a hole in the ground and someone would look at it and thereby use it - no, you don't have right to money. If you would create a new music style and someone would create similar music (and thereby use your work) - no, you don't have right to money. At least not legally. If you would, the community development would be hardly damaged.
we weren't talking about similarity, food, or holes in the ground. we were talking about stealing intelectual property. would you just be mature and admit that copying some things is stealing? and this is probably the last time i bother talking to you.
Well, we were talking about the right to money when people uses your work. I explained why there is a right to money only when you had an angreement about payment. I'm sorry, but copying IS NOT stealth, how many times you even say it. How can you think that I if a copy something, let i be a movie, a bike or anything, steal it?
Why must you get stuck up in semantincs? Did you ever create anything? And I mean creating, not copying. If you did, you'd understand what I'm saying, but since you don't understand, that means you didn't ever have the joy of creating something, did you?
"Why must you get stuck up in semantincs?" Because it's relevant for the discussion. Calling something stealth why it is not is a fallacy. I've created many things: blog posts, photos, etc. Please, can you just answer my arguments? Why is it wrong to copy things? There is no general right to payment without agreements before the work is done, so why shouldn't we be able to use people's work without paying?
I'm not telling you to pay, and I'm not telling you that you can't use it. But you have to have that person's consent before you use it. It's his creation, not fucking yours. And if he wants money from you before letting you use it for whatever purpose, it's his right.
(Yes, theft - sorry, my English is not great.) OK, so if I come up with a recipe, start a restaurant, and don't want people to use it, have I the right to stop people from going home from my restaurant when they eated there and creating the same sort of food at home and giving it to their friends? Legally, of course I don't. I don't think I have it morally either. What do you think?
It works as an example of why there not is any right to payment for work. Why dows it matter if it is made on the spot ot exported? The recipe is the chef's creation, and according to you, he should descide abut who can use copies of it. If I create a chair, do you think I should be able to descide who can use the copies of it?
In most cases, people who create a movie or music earn their living with it. If everyone would just copy their stuff without paying any money, they'd end up sleeping on the streets. You effectively steal the money you'd otherwise have paid for the product.
You might say "but i'm just a single person, it won't hurt anyone if i copy some media"... well, that might seem right, but that doesn't justify it nor is it reasonable. It could basically be said about any kind of stealing.
if you wrote a hit song and the whole world gets to hear it, then you have such a shitload of money (this is still true, even with all the piracy out there) you don't know what to do with the pile anymore. and piracy doesn't matter much then. oh instead of 50 million you only got 40 million dollars? what a shame...
my point is: our system (capitalism) is broken. the proportion of how much money you get for what you actually worked is insanely random.
and it's usually the people who already have enough money that get even more without having to do much, and people without any money have a very hard time getting it.
piracy is not right, but it's a way for people to get something they otherwise couldn't afford, thus they will always do it. as long as our system is so unfair.
to fight piracy, it's the wrong approach to just try and make it impossible (i think it's kinda funny how all those attempts fail miserably). instead you would have to change the whole system to make it fairer. no, i don't mean communism :) ...mm.. i don't feel like providing the solution to world-peace just yet, i'll keep that in my sleeve for a while longer ;)
my point is: if everyone always copies instead of buying it'll slowly become normal habit for everyone and no one will be able to earn any money at all by producing any kind of copieable media.
i'm not saying capitalism is fine the way it is. piracy is worst for the small people who barely earn their living with creatig stuff. also copying does in no way solve the randomness problem you mentioned earlier.
"I'm afraid you don't make use of arguments, only of stupid analogies that have nothing to do with what I'm trying to tell you."
It has certainly to do with copyright. Is there isn't a general right to payment when someone uses the ork (which there is not), then why shouldn't the same applies to music, film etc?
@purchack I see where you're coming from; but there is another side 2 it. If a million peeps copy your work it might just get spread around faster than if you sold stuff for actual money. And then you finally have a chance to go on tour doing live concerts and charge big bucks. The money is in the live concerts! We're in a new art world where marketing strategy is in our very own hands. The more stuff you give away for free over the internet the more fans you will get, if your stuff is GOOD!
@purchack The point is to trust your audience. You basically would earn much more. Search for more videos of Nina Paley and see what she has to say, her experience is really an eye opener !
Part of the idea behind creative commons is still attribution: you can use the song, but you still have to say who wrote it. The idea is then if you become really famous singing that song, everyone will still know who wrote it.
Well it's inclusion in that depends on what the creator wants. Tell me that YouTube is free of videos that their creators didn't want them on YouTube, go ahead, tell me :))
If I come up with a new derailleur design, and you then copy that, you have indeed stolen from me by reducing the market for my invention. That could reduce the market by just one person (the copier), or it could reduce the market by millions (if someone takes it and sells it in China). That's why we have intellectual property laws that go back hundreds of years.
Well, if someone would invent some kind of machine which could copy e.g. bikes, then of course the bike producers would want to criminalize use of that bike copiator. The bike copiator should be legal, as the bike producers should have to realize that selling copies of bikes no longer was a workable buisness model. Don't you agree?
Well, if you would be a philosopher, I would indeed reduce the market for your philosophical argues if I would spread them. But that isn't illegal. And it isn't immoralic, either, I think.
This has been flagged as spam show
♫ Copying can be theft.♫ Stealing these things leaves less pay left. Copying doesn’t settle the score if payment’s received no more. ♫ Copying can be theft.♫ If I copy yours I pay no dues The artist or writer is feeling blue – that’s what copies can do. If I protect my content, you’ll better understand how hard we work to make the stuff that’s so high in demand! Not paying for a thing, that is what’s called “copying” Sharing content with everyone -for artists, is just no fun. ♫
viciouscargo 8 months ago
Small people aren't harmed by "piracy" because it's harder to find a free download to smaller artists than it is to just pay the 1 dollar for the song. You're getting the wrong idea. It's big production companies that make millions and millions of dollars at opening day at the box office.
ayreface1 9 months ago
when people make videos with you, you should give them a plug in your comments section.. spread the love..
flicknausi 11 months ago
Copying is theft. When individuals or organizations spend money to develop products, they do so with the intention of profiting from sales. When sales are siphoned off by copying, the original developer(s) may not even have the opportunity to recoup their original investment. These lyrics are an oversimplification and a misrepresentation of the facts.
Romulusorion 1 year ago
@Romulusorion I think your overcomplicating and misrepresenting (perhaps misunderstanding) the facts.
For example. Most of the time sharing (or 'piracy' if you like) increases sales.
Thats not really siphoning off profits now is it?
2camjohn 1 year ago
@2camjohn You'll have to substantiate that statement with some objectively verifiable numbers. In these economically difficult times, I don't see how people who have been given a ripped copy of a CD would necessarily purchase the original if they don't have to. When a pharmaceutical company spends millions to develop a product and another company copies it within the first 3 months of its release, that is profit siphoning. I'm not complicating anything. I believe you haven't studied the issue.
Romulusorion 1 year ago
If there was no copyright, artists would need to get good and perform live to succeed.
That sounds great to me.
2camjohn 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Copying is nice, I'm all for sharing, but it's fucked the music, film, games, software industry.
The next thing will be books.
It's starting to get so bad that 1000's of people are leaving or being made unemployed from these industries every week.
The only way to combat this can only come from the Internet Service Providers, but the Hackers will always win.
tinghaling 1 year ago
how is copying not theft? It's theft of livelihood for musicians.
finefinefine 1 year ago
@finefinefine what if i would never buy what i copying how is it stealing? theres no way they would ever get money from me
Dot2TheLock 1 year ago
horrible..........sorry but atleast perfect the lipsync before posting this lame vid.
BenjaminConstruct 1 year ago
Nice job, though I would have preferred it without Nina singing along =\
AkiraTakahara 1 year ago
I heard the singer of Tool say that the average band has to sell a half a million records to break-even and begin making money.
harkits 2 years ago
in the old counterculture they used the term "liberating" when copying stuff...let's go back to that then...for everybody!
aachelabelaaron 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Black people "steal" and "bootleg". That's wrong. White people simply "copy" things. Kind of like how they didn't "steal" this country from the Native Americans. They simply "copied" deceitful business practices from other people.
White makes everything "right"!
sagaofbluewing 2 years ago
EU and USA must cool down on their property rights... If it's been on for 20 years, on radio, TV, DVDs, internet... how can you claim that it is still yours?
If you want it to be 'yours' and private please keep it in a research lab vault and don't release into public.
Knowledge is public, protect your private data, but don't claim knowledge to be personal.
In other countries 'buying' is not an option, legal CDs are not in stores
koteban 2 years ago
here's an idea: let's all be overly serious about a video that's meant to be humorous!
ohalixrose 2 years ago
yeah.. let's be overly serious about being overly serious ;)
sebihoo 2 years ago
I don't disagree but you're both retarded looking and sounding.
Slabel 2 years ago
Yeah, copying is always ok!
I'm hoping that in the future there will be machines that copy stuff. Then I could just copy the all the candies I want from a friend who might've bought 'em and so I wouldn't have to go shopping at all anymore! We could, like, get lots of candies for our whole group by investing only a few cents to one candy and then we could copy that candy to each of us! That's ok because that's not theft!
Man, life is going to be fun and easy in the future :)
Airola 2 years ago
feel free and copy a bicycle
idiots
Petrooli 2 years ago
I don´t think that the point of the song was to claim that one should copy a bicycle, but rather say that there´s difference between copying and stealing.
discasting 2 years ago
Regardless, I'd certainly copy a bicycle if I could.
J4mes1991 2 years ago
LOL, I love this song! Hee hee!
datalal624 2 years ago
LOL...I disagree with the content of the song. But funny nonetheless.
shonester 2 years ago
Really good. Should try to translate it to swedish for our Pirate Party campaign.
Send PP to EU on June 7 !!!!
EzelWesik 2 years ago
Smart!
mrbulletdodger 2 years ago
Although I liked this counter-culture idea... but, uhh... copying IS stealing in today's society. I mean, Bicycles? Come on... bad analogy. What if I had this artwork, and someone is 'copying' it and sell it and have profit from it?
vanguardnine 2 years ago
No, it isn't stealing. Sometimes it's violation of copyright law. But that isn't stealing.
"What if I had this artwork, and someone is 'copying' it and sell it and have profit from it?"
IMO that shouldn't be OK, 'cause that would make people create less culture. However, non-commercial use should be legal.
Guldsiska 2 years ago
Thank you for your enlightenment. Maybe I'll rip this song and play it with my band.
vanguardnine 2 years ago
Yeah, deffinetly, we could have like dozens of bands playing this same song, and you bet I'd insist that i wrote the lyrics, not Nina Paley, and my bandmate here Jimmy wrote the music, not therockcookiebottom. Wouldn't that be nice? One for me, one for you, in fact, one for each and every one of us! Don't tell me you're so naive to believe that people are sincere and nobody would ever claim to have created something they didn't.
purchack 2 years ago
But the topic is another one, in fact, it's copying. If you would one day consider that you're efforts in creating music are so great that you would deserve to be paid for your work, would you like it if I would give out free ripped coppies of your work to others? What if I would in fact sell your work for a fraction of what you sell it for, making some money on account of your creations. Would you like that?
purchack 2 years ago
Depends on creator's will basically. If I work for yesrs on one great book or one great album and want to sell it, I deffinetly couldn't agree with selling one copy, and the world sharing it freely, me making maybe 30 dollars for years of work and practicly loosing hundreds to thousands of dollars in investment money. It gets much worse if my attempt is to live of the money that I make out of, say, music or writing.
purchack 2 years ago 3
If you do work, you don't have right to money. You don't have it even if people uses your work. If you would have, then chefs would have the right to stop people from making the same kind of food, and chess players could stop people from imitating their playing style, and everyone who would come up wth a new method of doing something could stop everyone from uusing that method without payment. It would be very bad for the community.
Guldsiska 2 years ago
[If you do work, you don't have right to money. You don't have it even if people uses your work.]
What? Excuse me? I thought we were having a serious conversation here, among adulds. I now seriously disregard you for that statement. If you're indeed a 13 year old, why don't you go talk about Pokemon or something? Geez... the people these days...
purchack 2 years ago
If you for example would make up a new recipe, and someone uses it - no, you don't have right to money. If you would go out and dig a hole in the ground and someone would look at it and thereby use it - no, you don't have right to money. If you would create a new music style and someone would create similar music (and thereby use your work) - no, you don't have right to money. At least not legally. If you would, the community development would be hardly damaged.
Guldsiska 2 years ago
we weren't talking about similarity, food, or holes in the ground. we were talking about stealing intelectual property. would you just be mature and admit that copying some things is stealing? and this is probably the last time i bother talking to you.
purchack 2 years ago
Well, we were talking about the right to money when people uses your work. I explained why there is a right to money only when you had an angreement about payment. I'm sorry, but copying IS NOT stealth, how many times you even say it. How can you think that I if a copy something, let i be a movie, a bike or anything, steal it?
Guldsiska 2 years ago
Why must you get stuck up in semantincs? Did you ever create anything? And I mean creating, not copying. If you did, you'd understand what I'm saying, but since you don't understand, that means you didn't ever have the joy of creating something, did you?
purchack 2 years ago
"Why must you get stuck up in semantincs?" Because it's relevant for the discussion. Calling something stealth why it is not is a fallacy. I've created many things: blog posts, photos, etc. Please, can you just answer my arguments? Why is it wrong to copy things? There is no general right to payment without agreements before the work is done, so why shouldn't we be able to use people's work without paying?
Guldsiska 2 years ago
I don't think you mean stealth, maybe theft?
I'm not telling you to pay, and I'm not telling you that you can't use it. But you have to have that person's consent before you use it. It's his creation, not fucking yours. And if he wants money from you before letting you use it for whatever purpose, it's his right.
purchack 2 years ago
(Yes, theft - sorry, my English is not great.) OK, so if I come up with a recipe, start a restaurant, and don't want people to use it, have I the right to stop people from going home from my restaurant when they eated there and creating the same sort of food at home and giving it to their friends? Legally, of course I don't. I don't think I have it morally either. What do you think?
Guldsiska 2 years ago
I think food is a very bad example when talking about copyright. Food is made on the spot, food isn't first cooked then exported. Try something else.
purchack 2 years ago
It works as an example of why there not is any right to payment for work. Why dows it matter if it is made on the spot ot exported? The recipe is the chef's creation, and according to you, he should descide abut who can use copies of it. If I create a chair, do you think I should be able to descide who can use the copies of it?
Guldsiska 2 years ago
goodbye and farewell, punk.
purchack 2 years ago
If you can't or don't want to answer my arguments, sure, goodbye. Use of personal attacks isn't good.
Guldsiska 2 years ago
In most cases, people who create a movie or music earn their living with it. If everyone would just copy their stuff without paying any money, they'd end up sleeping on the streets. You effectively steal the money you'd otherwise have paid for the product.
You might say "but i'm just a single person, it won't hurt anyone if i copy some media"... well, that might seem right, but that doesn't justify it nor is it reasonable. It could basically be said about any kind of stealing.
nalcarya 2 years ago
if you wrote a hit song and the whole world gets to hear it, then you have such a shitload of money (this is still true, even with all the piracy out there) you don't know what to do with the pile anymore. and piracy doesn't matter much then. oh instead of 50 million you only got 40 million dollars? what a shame...
my point is: our system (capitalism) is broken. the proportion of how much money you get for what you actually worked is insanely random.
sebihoo 2 years ago
and it's usually the people who already have enough money that get even more without having to do much, and people without any money have a very hard time getting it.
piracy is not right, but it's a way for people to get something they otherwise couldn't afford, thus they will always do it. as long as our system is so unfair.
sebihoo 2 years ago
to fight piracy, it's the wrong approach to just try and make it impossible (i think it's kinda funny how all those attempts fail miserably). instead you would have to change the whole system to make it fairer. no, i don't mean communism :) ...mm.. i don't feel like providing the solution to world-peace just yet, i'll keep that in my sleeve for a while longer ;)
sebihoo 2 years ago
my point is: if everyone always copies instead of buying it'll slowly become normal habit for everyone and no one will be able to earn any money at all by producing any kind of copieable media.
i'm not saying capitalism is fine the way it is. piracy is worst for the small people who barely earn their living with creatig stuff. also copying does in no way solve the randomness problem you mentioned earlier.
nalcarya 2 years ago
yeah i know im kinda late with this answer *_*
nalcarya 2 years ago
"If you're indeed a 13 year old, why don't you go talk about Pokemon or something?"
Argumentum ad hominem are never good in discussions. Answer my arguments, don't comment irrelevant things such as my age.
Guldsiska 2 years ago
I'm afraid you don't make use of arguments, only of stupid analogies that have nothing to do with what I'm trying to tell you.
purchack 2 years ago
"I'm afraid you don't make use of arguments, only of stupid analogies that have nothing to do with what I'm trying to tell you."
It has certainly to do with copyright. Is there isn't a general right to payment when someone uses the ork (which there is not), then why shouldn't the same applies to music, film etc?
Guldsiska 2 years ago
@purchack I see where you're coming from; but there is another side 2 it. If a million peeps copy your work it might just get spread around faster than if you sold stuff for actual money. And then you finally have a chance to go on tour doing live concerts and charge big bucks. The money is in the live concerts! We're in a new art world where marketing strategy is in our very own hands. The more stuff you give away for free over the internet the more fans you will get, if your stuff is GOOD!
menderfire9 8 months ago
@purchack The point is to trust your audience. You basically would earn much more. Search for more videos of Nina Paley and see what she has to say, her experience is really an eye opener !
mizimakov 3 weeks ago
But if I spend 10 minutes creating something, then yeah, I guess you could have it for free.
purchack 2 years ago
Part of the idea behind creative commons is still attribution: you can use the song, but you still have to say who wrote it. The idea is then if you become really famous singing that song, everyone will still know who wrote it.
therockcookiebottom 2 years ago
Well it's inclusion in that depends on what the creator wants. Tell me that YouTube is free of videos that their creators didn't want them on YouTube, go ahead, tell me :))
purchack 2 years ago
Very good :-).
Guldsiska 2 years ago
I did the same thing- perhaps you could make a version with me, you, AND Nina Paley!
SamECircle 2 years ago
cachie
Rijk1 2 years ago
If I come up with a new derailleur design, and you then copy that, you have indeed stolen from me by reducing the market for my invention. That could reduce the market by just one person (the copier), or it could reduce the market by millions (if someone takes it and sells it in China). That's why we have intellectual property laws that go back hundreds of years.
NoMoreBlatherDotCom 2 years ago
Well, if someone would invent some kind of machine which could copy e.g. bikes, then of course the bike producers would want to criminalize use of that bike copiator. The bike copiator should be legal, as the bike producers should have to realize that selling copies of bikes no longer was a workable buisness model. Don't you agree?
Guldsiska 2 years ago
Well, if you would be a philosopher, I would indeed reduce the market for your philosophical argues if I would spread them. But that isn't illegal. And it isn't immoralic, either, I think.
Guldsiska 2 years ago
So... Can we "copy" the songs you sell for a dollar?
luke9828 2 years ago 2
Sure, as long as you spread the word about my work. That's the idea anyway.
therockcookiebottom 2 years ago 6
@therockcookiebottom That's right! That's why they are a dollar right? This is a perfect way to show your audiences that you trust them! Bravo :D
mizimakov 3 weeks ago
Damn, I feel like making Rock Cookie Bottom stickers and pasting em in every bus shelter in the city.
Love this channel/project so much.
QueenBeeAndBabyDuck 3 years ago
if you make some I want some!
marceloyanez111 3 years ago
Im in too! :D
BillybobAndersson 2 years ago
Copying is indeed fun.
Mattgt128 3 years ago