Welcome to Gaia! ::


Fanatical Zealot

Quote:
We do not feel the need to pay for a private companies work, because we find it poor quality enough to by not even come across the idea of buying a physical hard copy.


Whow whow whow.

So if I think all your stuff is s**t that gives me the legal right to steal it?


Now come on, that's just bullshit.

If you don't like it, don't buy it, simple as that, stealing it is just awful.

Friendly Raider

Gill_Of_Octane
SaguaroDundee
Gill_Of_Octane
So OP, what exactly do you find thats so unsettling about this bill? What are the potential abuses that you have in mind?

Please just dont say you cant get music or software for free anymore, you shouldnt be able to in the first place. Give us real reasons to be concerned about this bill.

If a mass of citizens wish to prepare and peacefully gather for fiscal revolution against either a) the Government or B) a private company, the best device is a public internet. By allowing for this act, we take a major line of communication and cut it off.

How so? I'm not going to lie, I have no idea what you mean by fiscal revolution. But thats not important, because either way it has nothing to do with this act. Is the fiscal revolution legal (I ligitimately dont know the answer to that)? If its illegal and prohibited, then theres nothing wrong with stopping a criminal activity. If it is legal, theres nothing that can be done against these citizens by the government, even if reported. The "communication line" you speak of is not your property. You did not pay for it and even as it stands now without this act passed, the site has full right to censor what you say. Remember the various site blackouts during the protest against SOPA? Thats all examples of how the company that runs these sites have the sole authority to provide content and service or not to as they choose. Because the site, the server, etc. is their property. It might not look like it, but when those sites blacked out, its a form a censorship.

SaguaroDundee
We do not feel the need to pay for a private companies work, because we find it poor quality enough to by not even come across the idea of buying a physical hard copy.

Then you have no right to the work, simple as that. Obtaining work/goods without paying is called theft/piracy. You're not entitled to other's property.

SaguaroDundee
Each time I download an album, I am constantly faced with the question of "will I buy a hard copy of this?"
Well yes, if I find it's quality good enough.

Entitlement and rights to copyright material is not based on the user's opinion of worth. You're not entitled to anything if you dont pay for it, even if you think its not up to your standards or if you think the work/good is garbage.

SaguaroDundee
Intellectual property and copy right means nothing on the internet when it comes to sharing. If the companies are going to offer poor quality to the point that a people do not want to support them, they should fail.

Thats illegal sharing. Explain why specifically copyright and intellectual property should be exempted only if its on the internet. What differs between internet copyright/property and physical copyright/property? If the company offer poor quality and goes out of business, fine, but it still dont give you the right to use it for free. They should fail because noone wants to buy their product, not because people stole it.

SaguaroDundee

But more importantly, cyber crime. Is a boycott considered a crime? I don't think so. So why do companies view it this way? Is distributing an already payed for book a crime, i.e. a Library? Is trolling a crime? No, so why do a people become scared of free speech? Is threatening someone on the internet a crime? Is looking at a wall and imagining your shadow as someone else and then threatening your shadow a crime? No, it's generally fantasy.

Sure. Thats why this bill does not define what "crime" is. This bill only makes it so that you cant hide criminal activity on the internet. It doesnt define what acts are considered criminal. Thats for another law to define.

You're arguing against bills that dont even exist, and misdirecting it to this bill. If a bill that comes up for making boycotting a criminal activity, by all means fight that bill. If a bill comes up that is making free speech criminal, by all means fight it. If a bill comes up that makes you screaming at your shadow illegal, by all means fight it. Those are the actual laws you're against arguing against, not this one. You, just like the OP is not grasping that this act will not be the one to charge you with anything. What you're actually picking a bone with is the fact the internet is no longer a safe haven for criminal activity.

Basically fiscal revolution is my idea of Civil Disobedience.

And i'm giving you physical equivalents for the crimes they want to charge us for on the internet.

Friendly Raider

Suicidesoldier#1
Quote:
We do not feel the need to pay for a private companies work, because we find it poor quality enough to by not even come across the idea of buying a physical hard copy.


Whow whow whow.

So if I think all your stuff is s**t that gives me the legal right to steal it?


Now come on, that's just bullshit.

If you don't like it, don't buy it, simple as that, stealing it is just awful.

Uhhh, did you sample or get a copy of my s**t from your friend? Or did you hack into my private data to obtain my s**t?

Fanatical Zealot

SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
Quote:
We do not feel the need to pay for a private companies work, because we find it poor quality enough to by not even come across the idea of buying a physical hard copy.


Whow whow whow.

So if I think all your stuff is s**t that gives me the legal right to steal it?


Now come on, that's just bullshit.

If you don't like it, don't buy it, simple as that, stealing it is just awful.

Uhhh, did you sample or get a copy of my s**t from your friend? Or did you hack into my private data to obtain my s**t?


What?

Copy the sample of course.

Friendly Raider

Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
Quote:
We do not feel the need to pay for a private companies work, because we find it poor quality enough to by not even come across the idea of buying a physical hard copy.


Whow whow whow.

So if I think all your stuff is s**t that gives me the legal right to steal it?


Now come on, that's just bullshit.

If you don't like it, don't buy it, simple as that, stealing it is just awful.

Uhhh, did you sample or get a copy of my s**t from your friend? Or did you hack into my private data to obtain my s**t?


What?

Copy the sample of course.

Ok whatever, if a friend shared it with you, and you think it's s**t, and then you didn't buy it..... Whoopdy. No money, no foul.

truth though, Megaupload was making profit off of sharing, so I can kind of see a point to acts like shutting them down n s**t.

hmmm...

Fanatical Zealot

SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
Quote:
We do not feel the need to pay for a private companies work, because we find it poor quality enough to by not even come across the idea of buying a physical hard copy.


Whow whow whow.

So if I think all your stuff is s**t that gives me the legal right to steal it?


Now come on, that's just bullshit.

If you don't like it, don't buy it, simple as that, stealing it is just awful.

Uhhh, did you sample or get a copy of my s**t from your friend? Or did you hack into my private data to obtain my s**t?


What?

Copy the sample of course.

Ok whatever, if a friend shared it with you, and you think it's s**t, and then you didn't buy it..... Whoopdy. No money, no foul.

truth though, Megaupload was making profit off of sharing, so I can kind of see a point to acts like that n s**t.

hmmm...


Okay see, that's like saying you go into a candy store, eat their food, don't like it, so you don't pay for it.

You stole their food and ate it, they need money off of that.


That's just evil.

Don't buy from there again, okay, but to say you shouldn't have to pay for it becuase you don't like it is absurd.


I mean anyone can say that, and then just get free everything.

More or less, if you take their stuff, which they worked hard for, you're going to have to pay for it. O_o
SaguaroDundee
Gill_Of_Octane
SaguaroDundee
Gill_Of_Octane
So OP, what exactly do you find thats so unsettling about this bill? What are the potential abuses that you have in mind?

Please just dont say you cant get music or software for free anymore, you shouldnt be able to in the first place. Give us real reasons to be concerned about this bill.

If a mass of citizens wish to prepare and peacefully gather for fiscal revolution against either a) the Government or B) a private company, the best device is a public internet. By allowing for this act, we take a major line of communication and cut it off.

How so? I'm not going to lie, I have no idea what you mean by fiscal revolution. But thats not important, because either way it has nothing to do with this act. Is the fiscal revolution legal (I ligitimately dont know the answer to that)? If its illegal and prohibited, then theres nothing wrong with stopping a criminal activity. If it is legal, theres nothing that can be done against these citizens by the government, even if reported. The "communication line" you speak of is not your property. You did not pay for it and even as it stands now without this act passed, the site has full right to censor what you say. Remember the various site blackouts during the protest against SOPA? Thats all examples of how the company that runs these sites have the sole authority to provide content and service or not to as they choose. Because the site, the server, etc. is their property. It might not look like it, but when those sites blacked out, its a form a censorship.

SaguaroDundee
We do not feel the need to pay for a private companies work, because we find it poor quality enough to by not even come across the idea of buying a physical hard copy.

Then you have no right to the work, simple as that. Obtaining work/goods without paying is called theft/piracy. You're not entitled to other's property.

SaguaroDundee
Each time I download an album, I am constantly faced with the question of "will I buy a hard copy of this?"
Well yes, if I find it's quality good enough.

Entitlement and rights to copyright material is not based on the user's opinion of worth. You're not entitled to anything if you dont pay for it, even if you think its not up to your standards or if you think the work/good is garbage.

SaguaroDundee
Intellectual property and copy right means nothing on the internet when it comes to sharing. If the companies are going to offer poor quality to the point that a people do not want to support them, they should fail.

Thats illegal sharing. Explain why specifically copyright and intellectual property should be exempted only if its on the internet. What differs between internet copyright/property and physical copyright/property? If the company offer poor quality and goes out of business, fine, but it still dont give you the right to use it for free. They should fail because noone wants to buy their product, not because people stole it.

SaguaroDundee

But more importantly, cyber crime. Is a boycott considered a crime? I don't think so. So why do companies view it this way? Is distributing an already payed for book a crime, i.e. a Library? Is trolling a crime? No, so why do a people become scared of free speech? Is threatening someone on the internet a crime? Is looking at a wall and imagining your shadow as someone else and then threatening your shadow a crime? No, it's generally fantasy.

Sure. Thats why this bill does not define what "crime" is. This bill only makes it so that you cant hide criminal activity on the internet. It doesnt define what acts are considered criminal. Thats for another law to define.

You're arguing against bills that dont even exist, and misdirecting it to this bill. If a bill that comes up for making boycotting a criminal activity, by all means fight that bill. If a bill comes up that is making free speech criminal, by all means fight it. If a bill comes up that makes you screaming at your shadow illegal, by all means fight it. Those are the actual laws you're against arguing against, not this one. You, just like the OP is not grasping that this act will not be the one to charge you with anything. What you're actually picking a bone with is the fact the internet is no longer a safe haven for criminal activity.

Basically fiscal revolution is my idea of Civil Disobedience.

And i'm giving you physical equivalents for the crimes they want to charge us for on the internet.

So your beef is with the bills that actually makes cyber civil disobedience illegal, not with this bill.

Friendly Raider

Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
Quote:
We do not feel the need to pay for a private companies work, because we find it poor quality enough to by not even come across the idea of buying a physical hard copy.


Whow whow whow.

So if I think all your stuff is s**t that gives me the legal right to steal it?


Now come on, that's just bullshit.

If you don't like it, don't buy it, simple as that, stealing it is just awful.

Uhhh, did you sample or get a copy of my s**t from your friend? Or did you hack into my private data to obtain my s**t?


What?

Copy the sample of course.

Ok whatever, if a friend shared it with you, and you think it's s**t, and then you didn't buy it..... Whoopdy. No money, no foul.

truth though, Megaupload was making profit off of sharing, so I can kind of see a point to acts like that n s**t.

hmmm...


Okay see, that's like saying you go into a candy store, eat their food, don't like it, so you don't pay for it.

You stole their food and ate it, they need money off of that.


That's just evil.

Don't buy from there again, okay, but to say you shouldn't have to pay for it becuase you don't like it is absurd.


I mean anyone can say that, and then just get free everything.

More or less, if you take their stuff, which they worked hard for, you're going to have to pay for it. O_o

But data is replicable beyond candy. It's more having a friend who bought some candy and then deconstruct a recipe for the candy, and then made candy to share, then shared the candy... and if I feel inclined enough buy candy from the original recipe makers.
I'm not saying I'm personally going into someones store and ripping them off. That's absurd.

Friendly Raider

Gill_Of_Octane
SaguaroDundee

Basically fiscal revolution is my idea of Civil Disobedience.

And i'm giving you physical equivalents for the crimes they want to charge us for on the internet.

So your beef is with the bills that actually makes cyber civil disobedience illegal, not with this bill.

Hah, now I just need to know if they exist or not. Such as any bills that do not consider mediafire or something like that as a private library/sharing center. Of course it's not lending anymore, but that was never the point of a library.

Fanatical Zealot

SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee

Uhhh, did you sample or get a copy of my s**t from your friend? Or did you hack into my private data to obtain my s**t?


What?

Copy the sample of course.

Ok whatever, if a friend shared it with you, and you think it's s**t, and then you didn't buy it..... Whoopdy. No money, no foul.

truth though, Megaupload was making profit off of sharing, so I can kind of see a point to acts like that n s**t.

hmmm...


Okay see, that's like saying you go into a candy store, eat their food, don't like it, so you don't pay for it.

You stole their food and ate it, they need money off of that.


That's just evil.

Don't buy from there again, okay, but to say you shouldn't have to pay for it becuase you don't like it is absurd.


I mean anyone can say that, and then just get free everything.

More or less, if you take their stuff, which they worked hard for, you're going to have to pay for it. O_o

But data is replicable beyond candy. It's more having a friend who bought some candy and then deconstruct a recipe for the candy, and then made candy to share, then shared the candy... and if I feel inclined enough buy candy from the original recipe makers.
I'm not saying I'm personally going into someones store and ripping them off. That's absurd.


And somebody steals and gives you a patented secret formula I mean yeah, it's still pretty much stealing.

Friendly Raider

Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee

Uhhh, did you sample or get a copy of my s**t from your friend? Or did you hack into my private data to obtain my s**t?


What?

Copy the sample of course.

Ok whatever, if a friend shared it with you, and you think it's s**t, and then you didn't buy it..... Whoopdy. No money, no foul.

truth though, Megaupload was making profit off of sharing, so I can kind of see a point to acts like that n s**t.

hmmm...


Okay see, that's like saying you go into a candy store, eat their food, don't like it, so you don't pay for it.

You stole their food and ate it, they need money off of that.


That's just evil.

Don't buy from there again, okay, but to say you shouldn't have to pay for it becuase you don't like it is absurd.


I mean anyone can say that, and then just get free everything.

More or less, if you take their stuff, which they worked hard for, you're going to have to pay for it. O_o

But data is replicable beyond candy. It's more having a friend who bought some candy and then deconstruct a recipe for the candy, and then made candy to share, then shared the candy... and if I feel inclined enough buy candy from the original recipe makers.
I'm not saying I'm personally going into someones store and ripping them off. That's absurd.


And somebody steals and gives you a patented secret formula I mean yeah, it's still pretty much stealing.

The candy/media was bought, and then shared.

Fanatical Zealot

SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee

Ok whatever, if a friend shared it with you, and you think it's s**t, and then you didn't buy it..... Whoopdy. No money, no foul.

truth though, Megaupload was making profit off of sharing, so I can kind of see a point to acts like that n s**t.

hmmm...


Okay see, that's like saying you go into a candy store, eat their food, don't like it, so you don't pay for it.

You stole their food and ate it, they need money off of that.


That's just evil.

Don't buy from there again, okay, but to say you shouldn't have to pay for it becuase you don't like it is absurd.


I mean anyone can say that, and then just get free everything.

More or less, if you take their stuff, which they worked hard for, you're going to have to pay for it. O_o

But data is replicable beyond candy. It's more having a friend who bought some candy and then deconstruct a recipe for the candy, and then made candy to share, then shared the candy... and if I feel inclined enough buy candy from the original recipe makers.
I'm not saying I'm personally going into someones store and ripping them off. That's absurd.


And somebody steals and gives you a patented secret formula I mean yeah, it's still pretty much stealing.

The candy/media was bought, and then shared.


Buying a candy bar- fine, that's okay.

Copying the secret formula, making more and then giving those away, even if it's for free?


You're taking a would be profit from someone who clearly spent all this time and money invested into making his company to sell the chocolates and come up with that secret formula, which, is really hard to do sense taste isn't objective and you'll never know what people will like.

If I say, write a book, and you steal the book, read it, get all the info, and never pay for it, how is that fair to me?


I mean I spent all this time and effort writing a book, you're paying me for a service, just as you would a story teller or a cashier or practically anyone who works- time, energy, effort, a desired goal.

Just becuase you don't like it doesn't mean you don't have to pay for it, that's crazy talk.
SaguaroDundee
Gill_Of_Octane
SaguaroDundee

Basically fiscal revolution is my idea of Civil Disobedience.

And i'm giving you physical equivalents for the crimes they want to charge us for on the internet.

So your beef is with the bills that actually makes cyber civil disobedience illegal, not with this bill.

Hah, now I just need to know if they exist or not. Such as any bills that do not consider mediafire or something like that as a private library/sharing center. Of course it's not lending anymore, but that was never the point of a library.

Isnt mediafire operated by a company as well?

You know, this also brings up another point with the whole public domain. The whole net is just one giant network of companies from all around the world. Each of those wires that data travels through is owned by someone, namely ISPs such as Verizon, Timewarner, etc. Thats what makes SOPA illegal and censorship but not this bill. SOPA didnt give the ISPs, and sites a choice to report illegal activities and censor certain IPs or users, while this one lets the ISPs and sites to disclose information at their disgression.
SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee

Ok whatever, if a friend shared it with you, and you think it's s**t, and then you didn't buy it..... Whoopdy. No money, no foul.

truth though, Megaupload was making profit off of sharing, so I can kind of see a point to acts like that n s**t.

hmmm...


Okay see, that's like saying you go into a candy store, eat their food, don't like it, so you don't pay for it.

You stole their food and ate it, they need money off of that.


That's just evil.

Don't buy from there again, okay, but to say you shouldn't have to pay for it becuase you don't like it is absurd.


I mean anyone can say that, and then just get free everything.

More or less, if you take their stuff, which they worked hard for, you're going to have to pay for it. O_o

But data is replicable beyond candy. It's more having a friend who bought some candy and then deconstruct a recipe for the candy, and then made candy to share, then shared the candy... and if I feel inclined enough buy candy from the original recipe makers.
I'm not saying I'm personally going into someones store and ripping them off. That's absurd.


And somebody steals and gives you a patented secret formula I mean yeah, it's still pretty much stealing.

The candy/media was bought, and then shared.

Which is where the patent will kick in and prohibit its share.

Ease of replication is not an exception to copyrights, patents, trademarks, etc.

Friendly Raider

Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee
Suicidesoldier#1
SaguaroDundee

Ok whatever, if a friend shared it with you, and you think it's s**t, and then you didn't buy it..... Whoopdy. No money, no foul.

truth though, Megaupload was making profit off of sharing, so I can kind of see a point to acts like that n s**t.

hmmm...


Okay see, that's like saying you go into a candy store, eat their food, don't like it, so you don't pay for it.

You stole their food and ate it, they need money off of that.


That's just evil.

Don't buy from there again, okay, but to say you shouldn't have to pay for it becuase you don't like it is absurd.


I mean anyone can say that, and then just get free everything.

More or less, if you take their stuff, which they worked hard for, you're going to have to pay for it. O_o

But data is replicable beyond candy. It's more having a friend who bought some candy and then deconstruct a recipe for the candy, and then made candy to share, then shared the candy... and if I feel inclined enough buy candy from the original recipe makers.
I'm not saying I'm personally going into someones store and ripping them off. That's absurd.


And somebody steals and gives you a patented secret formula I mean yeah, it's still pretty much stealing.

The candy/media was bought, and then shared.


Buying a candy bar- fine, that's okay.

Copying the secret formula, making more and then giving those away, even if it's for free?


You're taking a would be profit from someone who clearly spent all this time and money invested into making his company to sell the chocolates and come up with that secret formula, which, is really hard to do sense taste isn't objective and you'll never know what people will like.

If I say, write a book, and you steal the book, read it, get all the info, and never pay for it, how is that fair to me?


I mean I spent all this time and effort writing a book, you're paying me for a service, just as you would a story teller or a cashier or practically anyone who works- time, energy, effort, a desired goal.

Just becuase you don't like it doesn't mean you don't have to pay for it, that's crazy talk.


I suppose my ethics of information sharing are a tad extreme, and fiscally liberal. Do I mind if someone steals my book and understands and grasps the information? Depends on the content of my book.
I think it would be relevant to bring up Monsanto corp. When farm lands cross pollinate and uncontrollably share DNA between each other because of natural forces, Monsanto sues the farmers for copyright and stealing.

Though I'm not sure I have the patience enough to tie this into what we are talking about right now because the process which these farmers gain Monsanto "property" is entirely different than stealing or sharing knowledgeably between individuals . lol,

Soldier you've been my #1 enemy today, I appreciate our talks, but I must retire. Cya.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum