Select to expand quote
kiteboy dave said..sotired said..
Is it that arguable?.... Just because it doesn't appear to be a theft doesn't mean you aren't depriving someone from their legitimate income.
Well legally yes, there are many legitimate avenues of argument, nothing is clear cut.
As far as depriving someone of legitimate income, well that's most definitely arguable as well. Since the days of taping songs off the radio the copyright bodies have been crying that any unauthorised copy / play is depriving them of income. The stats have generally proven the opposite - far from killing music home taping grew music as a commodity. This 1982 campaign was all for naught.
..
I know a lot of people who wouldn't pay to go see a movie at the cinema unless soneone they knew had strongly recommended it - and that mostly happens by downloading. A good product will make legitimate money. Dallas Buyers Club was not a good product. It was, ironically, about a man who couldn't get product in a timely & cost effective manner so he broke the rules to get it.
sotired said..
If you extend this same logic to other things, it becomes a free for all.
Filesharing leads to Anarchy? Hmm. If I could download a car, I would. Does that make me an anarchist?
Sure. Give away your time for free, and then tell me about 'anarchy'.
I don't know what your 'stats' really say, but I doubt they are saying that copying leads to more sales. Maybe in the days of cassette tapes versus CDs, but not now. I can't notice the quality difference, so why would I buy it?
I know people that will happily share copied DVDs. If a person watches that at home, they won't go hire it from a video store, even if they really liked the movie.
So, it is depriving the artists or producers of money.
Your argument about cassette taping is not so good in that the quality back then was pretty poor. MP3 now leaves that for dead, and most people won't care about the slight improvement to CD. If they do, they would probably download a better version, or even buy it.
Why are you even worrying about the 'legality' line of reasoning? Just because something may not be deemed illegal does not make it right.
If you produced something that involved a lot of your talent, creativity, and money, would you happily share it with everyone else for nothing?
In my experience, people that go to movies, go to a lot of movies. They don't worry about what someone else said about it. I don't go to see many movies at all, but I know of people that go all the time. Good movie or bad, they go and see it. If they recommended a great movie to me, I still wouldn't see it unless I just happened to be wanting to see something.
Similarly, someone that downloaded it and said it was great is not going to affect whether I see it, and probably not for regular movie goers either.
Actually, in my case I do actually remember going to see a movie based on a work colleagues recommendation. It was rubbish. I guess there's no certainty that you have the same sense of humour as another. I guess if I had downloaded it, I would have watched the first 10 minutes of it and then deleted, and that would have saved me wasting my money at the cinemas.
Maybe piracy only affects "crap" movies? Nah...