Kamen Rider Kuuga Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 I'll just say this; Emulation of Ys 1 and 2 on the NES made me into a massive Ys fanboy, to the point where Ys I&II Chronicles, Oath in Felghana and Seven, all the Premium Editions, were first day buys for the PSP. I also bought I&II Chronicles+, Oath in Felghana and Origin on Steam, almost all first day. I hope Ark of Napishtim comes to Steam so I can finally pay them properly, since by the time I got the PS2 and PSP versions the game was out of print and I could only get them used. I'm buying a Vita simply for Memories of Celceta. I can say the same about Phantasy Star 2, 3 and 4 on Steam also with the Genesis Collection on the PSP. I can also say the same thing for Mega Man Zero, which I own all the GBA versions and the collection on the DS. So just because you can get them for free doesn't mean everybody will never pay for them, because I have gone out of my way to buy games for any platform that I have, buying used only when I had no other choice due to being out of print.
RitualClarity Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 I believe the music, movie and other industries are slowly realizing that they were hurting themselves with their over the top handling of this subject. Yes many indeed will go and buy the actual version if they find that they love it and want to support the artist or creators. Not everybody but some. That is the reason behind some changes in other countries where they go after the individuals that crack and upload the files not necessary against the users or downloaders. There are people I know that are convinced that they are not going to ever get in trouble because the powers that be are only going after those that upload. Every once in awhile you can find ads trying to shame those who illegally download content. However unlike Fat Kyurby I know individuals and I am sure the readers and members of LL also know these individuals, who have entire computers full of ripped and pirated material. Doesn't matter if it is out of print, hard to get, or even if they have the money or not. They take and use these materials simply because the refuse to buy anything that they can get for free on the internet. They feel that they shouldn't pay for anything digital because it doesn't cost the creator anything to distribute the material.
Demonhunter Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 ive been reading this for a while now and i have only seen one person say the right thing. the law is the law. thats it. i have no interest as to how you or anyone obtains , music,games,movies etc. thats your own buisness, i work for what i get i always have, if i wanted somthing very much i would save up the money to get it. i see no point in "stealing" because to me this is what pirated, cracked versions of anything is. its stealing. Ask your self this : You spend years working on a single thing you release it then you get $0.00 in return for all you have done. How would you feel? This to me is why copyrights are their. I respect the copyright laws, not because im a goody two shoe's but because i can understand the feeling of dispair of not getting a paycheck at the end off the day. Im also confused as to how people say that they are in poverty when they an accses the internet use a omputer and spend hours doing it?
Kamen Rider Kuuga Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 There are people who spend years on projects and release them for free; Cave Story is such a thing, and even though it's now for sale, the original (which is honestly still the best version) is still freeware. If I actually made something for the love of it, not because it was my job and I was looking for money, I wouldn't care who took it and used it.
Demonhunter Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 that has no bearing on my comment. that is obviously a freeware project, what i am talking about is intentionally breaking the copyright laws. stealing games,music etc. also your stating that its going to be a side project for you to do in your spare time when not working to earn money,if it was your job, i mod alot in my spare time i have no objections to my mods being used but a simple "hey can i use this" is enough for me. but if someone stole it from me with out asking its like a kick in the nuts. Tar it with whatever coloured feathers you want, copyright laws are their for a reason, people who rip and steal are breaking the laws and also contributing to the reason some company's fold and go out of buisness.
Kamen Rider Kuuga Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 Then maybe next time if you make a statement about working for years on something, you should add "for profit". Because as it stands, you make it sound like everybody who works on something for years will never do it as a freeware project. And yes, I bought Cave Story+ on Steam to support Pixel even though I could get the freeware version (and both the new and remastered sound tracks suck, the new graphics aren't amazing and Curly story, while kinda neat is literally nothing new besides some more lines of text and having a new sprite). Just because there's a free version, legal or not, doesn't mean we all just go right for the free one. Honestly, everybody in a copyright discussion seems to instantly assume that everybody will just go for the free version regardless, when there's so many people who don't. Which isn't to say copyright is somehow not needed, because it is. Just not the kind we have right now, which is a broken fucking mess. Just look at Steamboat Willie, a film made in 1928, with a copyright that won't expire until... 2023, if going by what we know today. Disney is so panic stricken over having that fall into public domain that they're lobbied time and again for copyright extensions. And it's not even like people can try to defend it by saying they would lose Mickey Mouse, because they wouldn't; not the modern versions, anyway. They're pushing this nonsense over a design that hasn't been used decades. Worse, they've threatened to sue people who had the sheer balls to confirm that the movie should be in the public domain because of faulty copyright notices.
gregathit Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 that has no bearing on my comment. that is obviously a freeware project, what i am talking about is intentionally breaking the copyright laws. stealing games,music etc. also your stating that its going to be a side project for you to do in your spare time when not working to earn money,if it was your job, i mod alot in my spare time i have no objections to my mods being used but a simple "hey can i use this" is enough for me. but if someone stole it from me with out asking its like a kick in the nuts. Tar it with whatever coloured feathers you want, copyright laws are their for a reason, people who rip and steal are breaking the laws and also contributing to the reason some company's fold and go out of buisness. Yes......and no. Napster users intentionally broke copyright laws. However most Napster users were not hardened criminals and most did not have some chip on their shoulder to "break" the music industry. Instead most simply were tired of a flawed business model that punished them at every turn. The funny part is with cassettes you could (and folks often did) tape stuff right off the radio to make your custom mix tapes. Yet with the switch to CDs nothing changed. To get the one (or 2) good songs a band had, you had to buy the whole album (which was overpriced to boot). The music industry was faced with a choice......give folks what they want, the way they want or suffer. This is just one example. Now I don't support folks pirating stuff, but I do understand why at times this happens and that it is not always a bad thing, as it can lead to positive changes in a company or industry. Sometimes breaking a particular law is the only way to bring attention to the fact that it needs changed. It damn sure isn't ideal, but it can be effective. As to folks going out of business......Disney won't go out of business if they loose all their bloated copyrights on things that should have expired LONG AGO. They have enough creative folks to come up with new stuff, as they currently have been doing for years. If a company can only stay in business by strangling any and all competition through laws and lobbying, then that company failing would be a good thing in the long run. Wouldn't you agree?
Demonhunter Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 @Fat i agree with some of what you say their, as for the for profit part i would have thought that would be implied, im not acusing anyone of specifically of stealing and neither am i assuming that people would go for the free version, this topic is about my "views on copy right" and as stated these are the ones i had expressed. we are all individuals and have different outlooks on things. i have the freedom to express them as you have the freedom to ignore them.
Demonhunter Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 that has no bearing on my comment. that is obviously a freeware project, what i am talking about is intentionally breaking the copyright laws. stealing games,music etc. also your stating that its going to be a side project for you to do in your spare time when not working to earn money,if it was your job, i mod alot in my spare time i have no objections to my mods being used but a simple "hey can i use this" is enough for me. but if someone stole it from me with out asking its like a kick in the nuts. Tar it with whatever coloured feathers you want, copyright laws are their for a reason, people who rip and steal are breaking the laws and also contributing to the reason some company's fold and go out of buisness. Yes......and no. Napster users intentionally broke copyright laws. However most Napster users were not hardened criminals and most did not have some chip on their shoulder to "break" the music industry. Instead most simply were tired of a flawed business model that punished them at every turn. The funny part is with cassettes you could (and folks often did) tape stuff right off the radio to make your custom mix tapes. Yet with the switch to CDs nothing changed. To get the one (or 2) good songs a band had, you had to buy the whole album (which was overpriced to boot). The music industry was faced with a choice......give folks what they want, the way they want or suffer. This is just one example. Now I don't support folks pirating stuff, but I do understand why at times this happens and that it is not always a bad thing, as it can lead to positive changes in a company or industry. Sometimes breaking a particular law is the only way to bring attention to the fact that it needs changed. It damn sure isn't ideal, but it can be effective. As to folks going out of business......Disney won't go out of business if they loose all their bloated copyrights on things that should have expired LONG AGO. They have enough creative folks to come up with new stuff, as they currently have been doing for years. If a company can only stay in business by strangling any and all competition through laws and lobbying, then that company failing would be a good thing in the long run. Wouldn't you agree? I wasnt implying that this was the only reason companys folded and died, but for every 1 in 100 people that download a free file thats 1 less part of a profit. but this has been happening for as long as pc's and as you stated Cassettes were able to do it. I do agree with some of that aswell, huge companys will and will aways stamp out any compitition. I just dont agree with breaking the laws of copyright to voice the issues. BUT.... when some companys get as big as some do it's always going to ignore the little things untill it comes back to bite them in the arse. So to a certain point i see the side of " Some rules are made to be broken" Its just a pity that these measures need to be taken to get the attention of these company's.
gregathit Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 I do agree with some of that aswell, huge companys will and will aways stamp out any compitition. I just dont agree with breaking the laws of copyright to voice the issues. BUT.... when some companys get as big as some do it's always going to ignore the little things untill it comes back to bite them in the arse. So to a certain point i see the side of " Some rules are made to be broken" Its just a pity that these measures need to be taken to get the attention of these company's. Exactly. Those big companies have such a stranglehold on things due to the money they can throw around (courts, lobbying and on and on), that common person has no other alternative. As I said, it is most definitely not ideal, but what else can they do? Life is often messy and there rarely is a simple or quick fix.
Demonhunter Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 Sometimes i think of it as this" Should i push the big red button or should'nt i ?" Some things need to be done to help prgression, but like i said its a pity it does.
Shanaro Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 Martin Luther King’s celebrated “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” this quote is a portion. "We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers." i'd hope Martin Luther King would be a good enough source. there is how ever a difference between legal and lawful. There is actually a difference between Legal and Moral. Hitlers might of been seen as "legal" in the country at the time however it wasn't morally correct. Cold blooded murder isn't a morally correct thing to do First off Ritualclarity, Godwin's Law. Personally I believe pirating is total crap. I mean, think about it. Those copyright and patent laws are in place to prevent a 3rd party from redistributing whatever is in question and sell it for their own amount of profit. I've read many copyright terms and I don't believe I've come across a single instance in where it was legitimately spelled out that no one may redistribute the product for personal use. Think about it this way, there have been many games I've pirated before buying, do you know why? It's simple, I'd like to know the quality of the game I'm about to purchase, and frankly Demo's don't really cut it. I've pirated many of Bethesda games, but now own most of them, simply because I was so impressed with the game I decided to actually by it. Now, should I be locked up for doing something that inevitably allowed me to purchase the product regardless?
RitualClarity Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 There are people who spend years on projects and release them for free; Cave Story is such a thing, and even though it's now for sale, the original (which is honestly still the best version) is still freeware. If I actually made something for the love of it, not because it was my job and I was looking for money, I wouldn't care who took it and used it. That is your choice and it is a very nice choice however it isn't the choice that others have made.
Endiness Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 I've read many copyright terms and I don't believe I've come across a single instance in where it was legitimately spelled out that no one may redistribute the product for personal use. Source? I didn't post a link earlier because I thought some might takes offense. CopyrightKids.org Copyright Holder/Owner
RitualClarity Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 Martin Luther King’s celebrated “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” this quote is a portion. "We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers." i'd hope Martin Luther King would be a good enough source. there is how ever a difference between legal and lawful. There is actually a difference between Legal and Moral. Hitlers might of been seen as "legal" in the country at the time however it wasn't morally correct. Cold blooded murder isn't a morally correct thing to do First off Ritualclarity, Godwin's Law. Wow somebody been reading Wikipedia huh... You do realize it was the OP that made the Hitler comment I just responded to it. Oh.. also MLK was referring to legality. It is understood that he would of helped "my Jewish brothers" because it was the "Moral" thing to do. You know reading between the lines and such. And yes even though Hitler was invoked the OP used a reference to MLK's comments on legality indicating that not all laws are correct or just. So if you are referring to my post for Godwin's Law, perhaps you need to do a little more research. and perhaps a lot more reading...
Shanaro Posted July 6, 2013 Posted July 6, 2013 Martin Luther King’s celebrated “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” this quote is a portion. "We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers." i'd hope Martin Luther King would be a good enough source. there is how ever a difference between legal and lawful. There is actually a difference between Legal and Moral. Hitlers might of been seen as "legal" in the country at the time however it wasn't morally correct. Cold blooded murder isn't a morally correct thing to do First off Ritualclarity, Godwin's Law. Wow somebody been reading Wikipedia huh... You do realize it was the OP that made the Hitler comment I just responded to it. Oh.. also MLK was referring to legality. It is understood that he would of helped "my Jewish brothers" because it was the "Moral" thing to do. You know reading between the lines and such. And yes even though Hitler was invoked the OP used a reference to MLK's comments on legality indicating that not all laws are correct or just. So if you are referring to my post for Godwin's Law, perhaps you need to do a little more research. and perhaps a lot more reading... Actually, she didn't make a direct reference to Hitler. It was a quote. While you on the other hand made the direct comparison to the difference between Moral and Legal obligations, stating that mass murder obviously isn't a moral thing to do, you indirectly compared individuals who violate copyright law to those who've committed mass murder. This may have not been your intention but that is how I read it. I learned about Godwin's law through my senior debate class two years ago, not something so fickle as Wikipedia. While I do agree that Skullete may not have been in the best position to break Godwin's law either (Even if it was through a quote), you did no better by responding to it in such a manner. Anyway, shall we get back to the topic at hand? I'd rather this not get into a topic about Hitler.. Ritual, if you do wish to continue this little side-debate, feel free to contact me via private messaging.
Shanaro Posted July 6, 2013 Posted July 6, 2013 I've read many copyright terms and I don't believe I've come across a single instance in where it was legitimately spelled out that no one may redistribute the product for personal use. Source? I didn't post a link earlier because I thought some might takes offense. CopyrightKids.org Copyright Holder/Owner Apologizes for the double post, here is your reference, Endiness. http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/copyright.act.chapt1b.html If you can find anything that forbids pirating for solely private use without profit, then be my guest.
Endiness Posted July 6, 2013 Posted July 6, 2013 (1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords; If you are not the copyright owner or have the permission of said copyright owner, your are not allowed to make copies of the owner's work, at all. (3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending; If you are nor the copyright owner or have the permission of said copyright owner, you can't distribute copies (which you already may not have permission to) in ways that don't involve selling/making a profit (and ways that do, of course).
RitualClarity Posted July 6, 2013 Posted July 6, 2013 Martin Luther King’s celebrated “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” this quote is a portion. "We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers." i'd hope Martin Luther King would be a good enough source. there is how ever a difference between legal and lawful. There is actually a difference between Legal and Moral. Hitlers might of been seen as "legal" in the country at the time however it wasn't morally correct. Cold blooded murder isn't a morally correct thing to do First off Ritualclarity, Godwin's Law. Wow somebody been reading Wikipedia huh... You do realize it was the OP that made the Hitler comment I just responded to it. Oh.. also MLK was referring to legality. It is understood that he would of helped "my Jewish brothers" because it was the "Moral" thing to do. You know reading between the lines and such. And yes even though Hitler was invoked the OP used a reference to MLK's comments on legality indicating that not all laws are correct or just. So if you are referring to my post for Godwin's Law, perhaps you need to do a little more research. and perhaps a lot more reading... Actually, she didn't make a direct reference to Hitler. It was a quote. While you on the other hand made the direct comparison to the difference between Moral and Legal obligations, stating that mass murder obviously isn't a moral thing to do, you indirectly compared individuals who violate copyright law to those who've committed mass murder. This may have not been your intention but that is how I read it. I learned about Godwin's law through my senior debate class two years ago, not something so fickle as Wikipedia. While I do agree that Skullete may not have been in the best position to break Godwin's law either (Even if it was through a quote), you did no better by responding to it in such a manner. Anyway, shall we get back to the topic at hand? I'd rather this not get into a topic about Hitler.. Ritual, if you do wish to continue this little side-debate, feel free to contact me via private messaging. Shanaro: In that post there was no comment on pirating in any sense. If you read the post and following post you would realize that the OP was trying to distinguish the fact that just because something was legal didn't mean it was right. It was a broad statement. I just comment in turn related to MLK's indirect reference and meaning of the Quote mentioned by the OP. Which later the OP agreed was indeed a fact. Both the Op and myself agree on this point. We both understood what the other was trying to convey. If that confused you then I apologize. If you wanted clarification you could of just asked. You post something publicly on a forum in response to anything I say I have the right to comment back unless a moderator states otherwise. If you wish to have a private conversation then you are free to do so.
RitualClarity Posted July 6, 2013 Posted July 6, 2013 I follow and agree with many things that Skullete proposes. Legal isn't necessary correct. Differences in morality and other major social issues. I just don't agree with the premise of some here that just because you don't have the same opportunities , monies, or capacity don't give you the right to obtain cracks, illegal downloads etc. Skullete you do have some interesting info and good arguments on various aspects of law and problems with them however you haven't made the argument given in post #3. As I think on the argument of people pirating software and the later buying it... Skullete Perhaps a poll on the subject? Something that might shed light at least related to those that are members and how often that happens. I believe I made my self clear on my stance and thoughts. I however am not close minded, if someone can come up with arguments which can include those with short income having the right or justification to pirate software, music etc. then I am more than willing to listen. In reality I don't really concern myself with what others are doing in relation to this. I know of people having entire hard drives full of games and hacks. Some never ever pay for software regardless of if they like it or it is useful or not.
gregathit Posted July 6, 2013 Posted July 6, 2013 If you can find anything that forbids pirating for solely private use without profit, then be my guest. http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-digital.html The general rule of thumb is you can't copy anything, for any reason, UNLESS specifically granted that right via the specific EULA of that product. Obviously the above only applies to the US. While copying something for your own use, like a backup copy of your favorite DVD movie is forbidden, in practical terms no one will ever know and thus you'll get away with it......provided you aren't flaunting it. Remember also that "personal use" means in your house\car and not taking it to your friends house or letting him borrow it and so forth. You can get into all sorts of "grey" areas with this as the both the government and companies are way behind the digital curve right now. Unfortunately any "grey" area typically means your guilty if you get caught. More info on US copyright laws: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html
RitualClarity Posted July 6, 2013 Posted July 6, 2013 Everybody that sees movies has to wait through this warning. Where the FBI really isn't concerned with a mom copying a child's DVD for protection they are concerned with uploading these to bittorrents or publicly trading and other uses. Generally if you own it you are pretty safe in the USA to change the format for a player, phone etc. or make backup copies. There are laws against this however rarely enforced. Notice that there are warnings that also include "without monetary gain" I am not sure the state of affairs on downloading such movies from bittorents here in the USA but I have been seriously warned by various individuals (that have a lot of experience, more so than myself in these matters) that is what they are looking for here.
RitualClarity Posted July 6, 2013 Posted July 6, 2013 I've read many copyright terms and I don't believe I've come across a single instance in where it was legitimately spelled out that no one may redistribute the product for personal use. Source? I didn't post a link earlier because I thought some might takes offense. CopyrightKids.org Copyright Holder/Owner Apologizes for the double post, here is your reference, Endiness. http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/copyright.act.chapt1b.html If you can find anything that forbids pirating for solely private use without profit, then be my guest. There is one problem with your link. It states that there is no guarantee, implied or otherwise, that the data here is either accurate or complete. This is an experimental version only. I would like to see actual pages from reliable sites which can used as a source of information.
Phelps1247 Posted July 6, 2013 Posted July 6, 2013 I believe in just due then just do. If I can't find something reasonably then I'll explore other options. For example an out of print movie. I love old horror/grindhouse movies. If I can't find it on DVD or Blu-ray but it's on Youtube well I'm gonna watch it on Youtube.
Angrybird Posted July 6, 2013 Posted July 6, 2013 The other day I was looking for some classical music in Youtube and someone claimed copyright infringement in one of the songs, enough said.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.