Well according to the law you don't own the digital information you experience but are buying the right to use it. However I'd go on a limb and say that nobody can "own" digital signals, which is all they really are. Its like someone trying to patent raw x-rays, you just can't. However lawyer talk makes it possible.
The law is one thing but when I give my money to someone and recieve a physical object I own it.
Also, I don't really photograph my secrets because theres enough porn on the web. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->prop·er·ty n. pl. prop·er·ties
1. 1. Something owned; a possession. 2. A piece of real estate: has a swimming pool on the property. 3. Something tangible or intangible to which its owner has legal title: properties such as copyrights and trademarks. 4. Possessions considered as a group. 2. The right of ownership; title. 3. An article, except costumes and scenery, that appears on the stage or on screen during a dramatic performance. 4. 1. A characteristic trait or peculiarity, especially one serving to define or describe its possessor. 2. A characteristic attribute possessed by all members of a class. See Synonyms at quality. 5. A special capability or power; a virtue: the chemical properties of a metal. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> pi·ra·cy n. pl. pi·ra·cies
1. 1. Robbery committed at sea. 2. A similar act of robbery, as the hijacking of an airplane. 2. The unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted or patented material: software piracy. 3. The operation of an unlicensed, illegal radio or television station. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There you go. If you want to talk about piracy and copyright infringment, then you should have said so in your original post.
Copyright Infringmenet != Stealing You don't deprive someone of something they own, therefore it is not stealing. You only deprive someone of something, if you would have bought that thing, rather than downloading it. Things get a lot muddier if you're distributing, too.
<!--QuoteBegin-Hellfire3k+Feb 22 2005, 12:21 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hellfire3k @ Feb 22 2005, 12:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> What about a vcr tape and the recorder. Is the vcr tape yours? Did you steal the tvs content. Should you pay a fee to the original copyright owners? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> The physical VCR tape is yours. The information stored on it is used by you according to a license with the copyright owner. If you are recording TV, that was found to be legal by the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the US), because you are just timeshifting content that you already paid for. It is not legal to distribute it to someone who doesn't have access to the content (because they didn't pay for HBO, or something). You don't have to pay a fee to the original copyright owners.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> What if you're creating a new form?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm not sure what you mean by this at all.
Seems like clearing a work of art and attributing/paying the copyright holders in a colloge would be like a plane in the 1900 flying over land where the property holder's rights extended to space and beyond.
<!--QuoteBegin-Hellfire3k+Feb 22 2005, 02:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hellfire3k @ Feb 22 2005, 02:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Seems like clearing a work of art and attributing/paying the copyright holders in a colloge would be like a plane in the 1900 flying over land where the property holder's rights extended to space and beyond. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> That's why we have fair use. You can use very small parts of a piece of art, without worrying about paying for it.
<!--QuoteBegin-Hellfire3k+Feb 22 2005, 02:52 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hellfire3k @ Feb 22 2005, 02:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> not in practice <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Name someone who has been successfully sued because they used a small piece of someone else's work in a collage.
You do not need to be successfully sued. The cost of fighting the case will bankrupt you. Bit old .. I get your point <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <a href='http://negativland.com/riaa/post.html' target='_blank'>http://negativland.com/riaa/post.html</a>
<!--QuoteBegin-Hellfire3k+Feb 22 2005, 03:07 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hellfire3k @ Feb 22 2005, 03:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You do not need to be successfully sued. The cost of fighting the case will bankrupt you. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes, I agree, it sucks.
<b>Tangible or intangible</b> (that is: stuff that exists physically, digitally and mentally) <b>objects which one has a personal right to use in the way one wishes, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others - based on the basic inherent economic and social principles of your society</b> (that is, you can shoot a gun on your land, as long as you're not firing into other people's land without their consent - and as long as that noise isn't violating some type of law applied within your area (which in itself would be violating others' rights to silence); or you can't take someone elses writing and call it your own)<b>.</b>
That means: someone cracking your computer (or performing actions without your expressed or implied consent) is violating your property; someone stealing your dreams without consent; etc...
I define piracy as:
<b>1. The taking of, copying of or redistribution of one's property by reducing definite future property without consent. 2. The taking of property through force which was not expressly consented upon at an earlier date.</b> [That is: taking someone's purse = bad; repossesing a sofa = okay] <b>3. Robbing at sea, as in "Arrr, that pirate 's commitin' piracy! Yarrrrgh!"</b> (which would actually fall under 2, but pffft, what's a piracy thread without a pirate?)
[edit: Notice: UltimaGecko's definition of property and piracy differ from their actual literal legal uses, <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> ]
Hehe in the computer everthing is a copy, the act of transfering the "work" into ram. The transmission to the screen. Everytime you use a copywrited work it is a copy. So if the owner decides you can only "copy"(read) the information 5 times. Can't they say that it is then piracy, because you exceed their consent?
Found it, <a href='http://www.phillipsnizer.com/library/cases/lib_case267.cfm' target='_blank'>http://www.phillipsnizer.com/library/cases/lib_case267.cfm</a> a company who distributes a collection of trailers.
<!--QuoteBegin-Hellfire3k+Feb 22 2005, 03:34 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hellfire3k @ Feb 22 2005, 03:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Hehe in the computer everthing is a copy, the act of transfering the "work" into ram. The transmission to the screen. Everytime you use a copywrited work it is a copy. So if the owner decides you can only "copy"(read) the information 5 times. Can't they say that it is then piracy, because you exceed their consent?
Found it, <a href='http://www.phillipsnizer.com/library/cases/lib_case267.cfm' target='_blank'>http://www.phillipsnizer.com/library/cases/lib_case267.cfm</a> a company who distributes a collection of trailers. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Once you use it more than 5 times, you'd be exceeding expressed consent. So yea, you'd basically be stealing by then. It's like the Microsoft Windows XP disc. You're supposed only be able to use it (3? 5?) times and then you're not supposed to use it anymore. If you find a way to get around that, you're going outside their consent (as un-nice as that is <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->), I think you should actually be able to negotiate any contract you read, so you're not forced into EULAs you might not necessarily agree with.
Hmm when your talking about property your not actually talking about ownership per se.
Your talking about rights, which is largely dependent on government. When you buy a house in this country you have the right to live in it and do as you please with it depending on what the government says. If you violate that, the government has a right to persecute you under the laws it sets.
So the definition of property not only varies from country to country, but in some cases state to state and even city to city.
For example:
If you got your car towed, what right does the city (or tow company) have to take your "property"? Well, depends on what laws the city has.
The rights of the city's governement (and the people it represents) are higher than your individual rights to park your property in a public space that has been marked as a tow zone. Therefore you rights are not violated, but passed over for the rights of the many.
Just out of curiosity, Hellfire3k, do you have a specific question and you're beating around the bush, or are you just trying to stir up a discussion about piracy?
<!--QuoteBegin-Fat Man Little Coat+Feb 22 2005, 07:34 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Fat Man Little Coat @ Feb 22 2005, 07:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Hmm when your talking about property your not actually talking about ownership per se.
Your talking about rights, which is largely dependent on government. When you buy a house in this country you have the right to live in it and do as you please with it depending on what the government says. If you violate that, the government has a right to persecute you under the laws it sets.
So the definition of property not only varies from country to country, but in some cases state to state and even city to city.
For example:
If you got your car towed, what right does the city (or tow company) have to take your "property"? Well, depends on what laws the city has.
<b>The rights of the city's governement (and the people it represents) are higher than your individual rights</b> to park your property in a public space that has been marked as a tow zone. Therefore you rights are not violated, but passed over for the rights of the many. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I disagree with this statement. The government's rights are lower than the rights of an individual. The government steps in to protect an individual from encroaching on another individual's rights. If you park your car in a way that encroaches on someone else's right to use the roads effectively, then your car will be towed.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The government's rights are lower than the rights of an individual. The government steps in to protect an individual from encroaching on another individual's rights. If you park your car in a way that encroaches on someone else's right to use the roads effectively, then your car will be towed.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not true.
One way to show this is look at a criminal case.
If you commit a crime the case is marked as "The people (of said state) vs (name)" The reason it states this is that the government on behalf of the people are seeking justice on the terms voted by the people of that state (or by representatives of those people). Only in civil cases do they actually say (name) vs (name), these cases are not in direct violation of the law (otherwise they'd be criminal).
This shows that the government as a body works on behalf of the majority of people. As a collective. Let me clarify further. If you're robbed, the court doesn't say " (your name) vs (name) in the criminal trial. Rather, it'll still say "the people of (said state) vs (name). The reason is because the courts don't see it as you vs him, they see it as the people of that state vs him. What I'm trying to show is that the attitude of the governmental court system is that of the majority's rights vs. yours. But thats a criminal case, so the argument isn't really addressed diretly.
here's a more practical example:
Not wearing a seatbelt or motorcycle helmet. If you don't wear these in certain states you can be fined. In this example, who's rights are you violating or encroaching by not wearing a helmet? The reasonable person would say no one, which is the truth of the situation, yet the laws would deem it okay to remove property (your money) from you.
This is an example where your rights are restricted by a larger government of people.
Other examples include: Smoking in public areas, **** Marriage, Suicide etc.
Your only really affecting yourself (by reasonable standards) or another consenting adult for **** marriage, yet in many states its still considered illegal or fineable offenses.
Comments
Piracy is taking someone elses property by force
I'm not saying if either is good or bad.
The law is one thing but when I give my money to someone and recieve a physical object I own it.
Also, I don't really photograph my secrets because theres enough porn on the web. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
n. pl. prop·er·ties
1.
1. Something owned; a possession.
2. A piece of real estate: has a swimming pool on the property.
3. Something tangible or intangible to which its owner has legal title: properties such as copyrights and trademarks.
4. Possessions considered as a group.
2. The right of ownership; title.
3. An article, except costumes and scenery, that appears on the stage or on screen during a dramatic performance.
4.
1. A characteristic trait or peculiarity, especially one serving to define or describe its possessor.
2. A characteristic attribute possessed by all members of a class. See Synonyms at quality.
5. A special capability or power; a virtue: the chemical properties of a metal.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
pi·ra·cy
n. pl. pi·ra·cies
1.
1. Robbery committed at sea.
2. A similar act of robbery, as the hijacking of an airplane.
2. The unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted or patented material: software piracy.
3. The operation of an unlicensed, illegal radio or television station.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There you go. If you want to talk about piracy and copyright infringment, then you should have said so in your original post.
Copyright Infringmenet != Stealing
You don't deprive someone of something they own, therefore it is not stealing. You only deprive someone of something, if you would have bought that thing, rather than downloading it. Things get a lot muddier if you're distributing, too.
The physical VCR tape is yours. The information stored on it is used by you according to a license with the copyright owner. If you are recording TV, that was found to be legal by the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the US), because you are just timeshifting content that you already paid for. It is not legal to distribute it to someone who doesn't have access to the content (because they didn't pay for HBO, or something). You don't have to pay a fee to the original copyright owners.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> What if you're creating a new form?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not sure what you mean by this at all.
That's why we have fair use. You can use very small parts of a piece of art, without worrying about paying for it.
Name someone who has been successfully sued because they used a small piece of someone else's work in a collage.
Bit old ..
I get your point <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <a href='http://negativland.com/riaa/post.html' target='_blank'>http://negativland.com/riaa/post.html</a>
Yes, I agree, it sucks.
<b>Tangible or intangible</b> (that is: stuff that exists physically, digitally and mentally) <b>objects which one has a personal right to use in the way one wishes, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others - based on the basic inherent economic and social principles of your society</b> (that is, you can shoot a gun on your land, as long as you're not firing into other people's land without their consent - and as long as that noise isn't violating some type of law applied within your area (which in itself would be violating others' rights to silence); or you can't take someone elses writing and call it your own)<b>.</b>
That means: someone cracking your computer (or performing actions without your expressed or implied consent) is violating your property; someone stealing your dreams without consent; etc...
I define piracy as:
<b>1. The taking of, copying of or redistribution of one's property by reducing definite future property without consent.
2. The taking of property through force which was not expressly consented upon at an earlier date.</b> [That is: taking someone's purse = bad; repossesing a sofa = okay]
<b>3. Robbing at sea, as in "Arrr, that pirate 's commitin' piracy! Yarrrrgh!"</b> (which would actually fall under 2, but pffft, what's a piracy thread without a pirate?)
[edit: Notice: UltimaGecko's definition of property and piracy differ from their actual literal legal uses, <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> ]
Found it, <a href='http://www.phillipsnizer.com/library/cases/lib_case267.cfm' target='_blank'>http://www.phillipsnizer.com/library/cases/lib_case267.cfm</a> a company who distributes a collection of trailers.
Found it, <a href='http://www.phillipsnizer.com/library/cases/lib_case267.cfm' target='_blank'>http://www.phillipsnizer.com/library/cases/lib_case267.cfm</a> a company who distributes a collection of trailers. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Once you use it more than 5 times, you'd be exceeding expressed consent. So yea, you'd basically be stealing by then. It's like the Microsoft Windows XP disc. You're supposed only be able to use it (3? 5?) times and then you're not supposed to use it anymore. If you find a way to get around that, you're going outside their consent (as un-nice as that is <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->), I think you should actually be able to negotiate any contract you read, so you're not forced into EULAs you might not necessarily agree with.
Your talking about rights, which is largely dependent on government. When you buy a house in this country you have the right to live in it and do as you please with it depending on what the government says. If you violate that, the government has a right to persecute you under the laws it sets.
So the definition of property not only varies from country to country, but in some cases state to state and even city to city.
For example:
If you got your car towed, what right does the city (or tow company) have to take your "property"? Well, depends on what laws the city has.
The rights of the city's governement (and the people it represents) are higher than your individual rights to park your property in a public space that has been marked as a tow zone. Therefore you rights are not violated, but passed over for the rights of the many.
Your talking about rights, which is largely dependent on government. When you buy a house in this country you have the right to live in it and do as you please with it depending on what the government says. If you violate that, the government has a right to persecute you under the laws it sets.
So the definition of property not only varies from country to country, but in some cases state to state and even city to city.
For example:
If you got your car towed, what right does the city (or tow company) have to take your "property"? Well, depends on what laws the city has.
<b>The rights of the city's governement (and the people it represents) are higher than your individual rights</b> to park your property in a public space that has been marked as a tow zone. Therefore you rights are not violated, but passed over for the rights of the many. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I disagree with this statement. The government's rights are lower than the rights of an individual. The government steps in to protect an individual from encroaching on another individual's rights. If you park your car in a way that encroaches on someone else's right to use the roads effectively, then your car will be towed.
Not true.
One way to show this is look at a criminal case.
If you commit a crime the case is marked as "The people (of said state) vs (name)"
The reason it states this is that the government on behalf of the people are seeking justice on the terms voted by the people of that state (or by representatives of those people).
Only in civil cases do they actually say (name) vs (name), these cases are not in direct violation of the law (otherwise they'd be criminal).
This shows that the government as a body works on behalf of the majority of people. As a collective. Let me clarify further. If you're robbed, the court doesn't say " (your name) vs (name) in the criminal trial. Rather, it'll still say "the people of (said state) vs (name). The reason is because the courts don't see it as you vs him, they see it as the people of that state vs him. What I'm trying to show is that the attitude of the governmental court system is that of the majority's rights vs. yours.
But thats a criminal case, so the argument isn't really addressed diretly.
here's a more practical example:
Not wearing a seatbelt or motorcycle helmet. If you don't wear these in certain states you can be fined. In this example, who's rights are you violating or encroaching by not wearing a helmet? The reasonable person would say no one, which is the truth of the situation, yet the laws would deem it okay to remove property (your money) from you.
This is an example where your rights are restricted by a larger government of people.
Other examples include: Smoking in public areas, **** Marriage, Suicide etc.
Your only really affecting yourself (by reasonable standards) or another consenting adult for **** marriage, yet in many states its still considered illegal or fineable offenses.