Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RabidBartender
You shouldn't have to pay anything. Everything you want should be free. YOU should be the one who decides what the price of something should be, no matter what its costs are.

Just because a court says it's okay, doesn't mean it's not stealing. I'm referring to a higher value system than "the law." Taking someone's intellectual property without compensation is thievery.

Now bring on all the talk about "the big mega-corporations, Man, they're like so corrupt and greedy," because I always love hearing so-called conservatives sound like a bunch of maggot-infested longhairs from the seventies when they justify their selfishness.
86 posted on 12/19/2003 9:06:42 AM PST by John Robertson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: John Robertson
So I should be tied to an antiquated method of distribution which forces me to pay monopoly prices? No thanks. I believe the market will solve the problem. If you would prefer that the state and a handful of media conglomerates solve the problem for you, then have at it.

You know, we're not all out here downloading Britney Spears and Metallica. There are actually folks (both artists and consumers) who thrive on this form of communication. Not all downloaders are criminals, so please get that idea out of your head.

Some of us are out here making music and listening to music that our peers make. Who are you to tell us that we can't do that?
100 posted on 12/19/2003 9:35:03 AM PST by jayef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

To: John Robertson
Taking someone's intellectual property without compensation is thievery.

Agreed. You present the moral highground. There is no doubt that there are people who are interested in simply stealing. But, I think you are going for black and white when there actually are shades of grey involved. First: What most of us object to are the RIAA's heavy handed approach to finding abusers. Including obtaining information they have no right to have. (Big Brother?) By doing so, they have put pirates in the light of being sympathetic figures. Second: Most of us are complaining that the RIAA has missed the boat. Unable to adapt. The RIAA's response is heavy handed, and desperate. Not quite what you'd expect from someone trying to keep customers. Some aritists will sell new music through downloads at their websites. There are ways to adapt and cater to your audience, and still make lots of money. And, a good artist should be compensated. There will always be theives. Doesn't make it right. But, when you ignore where the market is headed, and treat everyone like potential thieves, this is what you end up with. Screw the RIAA, they're floundering and I like it.
104 posted on 12/19/2003 9:37:29 AM PST by brownsfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

To: John Robertson
What a load of hyperbolic crap. I don't download anything, but because I bitch about the price of something, I'm a "maggot-infested longhair from the seventies"? Go to hell.
141 posted on 12/19/2003 10:20:33 AM PST by RabidBartender (2003: Conservative <> Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

To: John Robertson
"Taking someone's intellectual property without compensation is thievery. "

And that's why, to this day, no one can sing "Barbry Ellen" or "Greensleeves."
183 posted on 12/19/2003 11:09:02 AM PST by zook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

To: John Robertson
Dearest John:

Your mother.

Sincerely Yours,
Houmatt

359 posted on 12/21/2003 4:45:13 PM PST by Houmatt (Pray for Terri Schindler!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

To: John Robertson
Okay. Now let's get down to brass tacks.

I have been busy reading your posts in this thread, and three things strike me:

1) To download or otherwise capture copyrighted material, even if done for personal use, is how you define theft. (Before you tell me you are not including personal use, may I remind you you have not made that distinction, and you would have done so if that was indeed your intent.)

2) You have essentially proclaimed it makes no difference what arguments can be made for file sharing (for the purpose of the topic at hand); to you they are not relevant and you will not listen to them.

3) You have at least once called at least one other poster in this thread an outright thief.

In light of this, it is terribly easy to come up with responses, replete with comments derogatory. However, I decided to stick with the rather accurate assessment of you being a fool.

I could have said you are an immature retard, but that would be considered an insult to both pre-adolescent children and those with mental and/or physical challenges.

No, you are just incredibly close-minded on a mundane subject, with a mindset on par with hopelessly spoiled and improperly disciplined pre-adolescent children.

Or, to paraphrase the words of Samuel Clemens, better known to the world as Mark Twain: "It is better for one to think you a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

361 posted on 12/21/2003 5:22:47 PM PST by Houmatt (Pray for Terri Schindler!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson