Piracy Laws

[mungo]

Forum Sponsor

While I do occasionally consult Wikipedia, it's usually only to find better, more qualified sources

Ya... it was my last resort. The definition of intellectual property seems pretty fuzzy and tends to differ depending on who is describing it. But, since there is no one author for Wikipedia, I thought it was appropriate in this case.

 

[FiReSTaRT]

While I do occasionally consult Wikipedia, it's usually only to find better, more qualified sources

Amen, even though they do come in useful for quick reference.

 

[OpenGambit]

Intellectual Property is a very broad term. Generally consisting of Patents. Trademarks, or Copyright.
Patents and Copyright usually have expiry dates while Trademarks do not.
Trade secrets, while usually considered intellectual property, have no legal protections, its just "confidential information"

Intellectual Property should not be confused with Goodwill. ( However, the concepts are linked because the value of a trademarks is essentially goodwill. )

 

[FiReSTaRT]

Patents and Copyright usually have expiry dates while Trademarks do not.

Which are getting extended longer and longer every time Mickey Mouse is about to enter the Public Domain.. US legislators do a lot of "golfing" when those dates come up

 

[Baggsy]

What it comes down to is should someone get paid for their work or not?

Whether or not they've negotiated with a larger entity to take the bulk of the profit, shouldn't come into the picture.

I suppose that they are being forced to get a large entity involved, because otherwise they wouldn't have the resources to sue everyone selling their stuff, under the current laws.

 

[OpenGambit]

of course they should get paid, but this isn't about absolutes.

With regards to intellectual property, soceity has an interest in ensuring that society also benefits from the invention and that further inventions and creations can be added on top of it.
The process of sharing information is quintessentailly part of the human experience.

the way they are tackling this is completely crazy.
The internet is one of the most democratic inventions to have ever been created, it allows a forum for people to share whatever information they want, and that is a very important part of what I think human society is about. Blowing up the platfrom for copywritten songs in this case is akin to shutting down a school because some kids did a cover of lady gaga for the school talent show. Or shutting down times square because the street guy with the harmonica played a few bars of "I kissed a girl".

 

[FiReSTaRT]

What it comes down to is should someone get paid for their work or not?

I am not saying that the creator should not be paid for his content. However, it's unfair to the society for some corporation to have a monopoly making money off that content long after the creator's great-grandchildren become worm-food. Also, these laws stop legitimate sharing of information and take us back to the age of alchemy. During the age of alchemy, information was jealously kept, never shared and everyone had to reinvent the wheel. That brought us millennia upon millennia of ox-carts, swords, dirt roads and mud huts. Then came the age of science and universities, people started sharing information and we got stuff like industrial revolution an space travel within a couple centuries. Then a bunch of greedy corporations golfed a bunch of corrupt politicians into taking us back to the age of alchemy.

According to those laws, your computer should be taken away from you just because it can be used to pirate content. It doesn't matter that you don't use it for that purpose and don't plan to use it.

 

[SiNNeR]

the way they are tackling this is completely crazy.
The internet is one of the most democratic inventions to have ever been created, it allows a forum for people to share whatever information they want, and that is a very important part of what I think human society is about.

that is at the heart what this is about.

The government indeed has no statute / legal control over this environment, nothing with any teeth anyways.

They have witnessed the power of the internet in many places globaly, and are rightly concered (i say rightly for them/ not us the unwashed masses/pions)

a republic only works when it carrys the biggest stick, currently the internet levels the feild pretty dramatically. and this is a concern.

I tend to see this move as more of a long term aproach to control information and its disemination, and not "IP" persey.

 

[FiReSTaRT]

that is at the heart what this is about.

The government indeed has no statute / legal control over this environment, nothing with any teeth anyways.

They have witnessed the power of the internet in many places globaly, and are rightly concered (i say rightly for them/ not us the unwashed masses/pions)

a republic only works when it carrys the biggest stick, currently the internet levels the feild pretty dramatically. and this is a concern.

I tend to see this move as more of a long term aproach to control information and its disemination, and not "IP" persey.

I agree with you with one stipulation. The government will typically try to maintain effective control over the masses in order to maximize profits for whoever has it in its pockets. While they typically try to control the Internet in the name of fighting child pornography and piracy, they have used main force against conventional media and whistleblowers. They've bombed the state television network facilities in Serbia, they've gone after Julian Assange through those trumped up charges and by blocking his funding for legal defense.

 

[FiReSTaRT]

What it comes down to is should someone get paid for their work or not?

Sorry buddy, but this statement is leaving you WIDE open by failing to show your awareness of the big picture... Here's another Megaupload example that will hopefully open your eyes to another piece of it..

As you know, the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) can be used to take down content that infringes on copyright instantly, without due process (and the latest proposed laws are making it even easier). Megaupload either paid some celebs or had them volunteer to produce a promotional video, which was all originally produced, not infringing on anyone's rights, property of Megaupload. The media industry filed a takedown notice due to "copyright infringement" on that content in order to stop free speech. Now that is where we already are and they wanna make those laws even worse. Some of us might take exception to big corporations shutting down free speech through frivolous use of Stalinist laws and/or SLAPP's (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation - a.k.a. someone says something you don't like, you sue them to prevent them from saying it and to make others think twice about saying it).

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...es-umg-24-hours-to-explain-takedown-spree.ars

There's been no love lost between the American recording industry and the Hong Kong-based Megaupload. The RIAA has called Megaupload a "notorious service" that "thumbs their noses at international laws, all while pocketing significant advertising revenues from trafficking in free, unlicensed copyrighted materials."

So label executives must have been furious on Friday when the locker site unveiled a new promotional video featuring some of the music industry's biggest names singing the site's praises. One of the labels, Universal Music Group, went a step further and started filing takedown notices.

The legal basis for the takedown requests isn't clear. Megaupload says that the music and artwork in the video are original, and that it has signed agreements with everyone who appeared in it. An early report suggested that Will.I.Am sent a takedown request, but this may have been the work of an over-zealous lawyer, as Megaupload CIO Kim Dotcom says that he "spoke directly with will.i.am," and confirmed that the artist "absolutely had not authorized the submission of any takedown notice on his behalf."

 

[OpenGambit]

you guys like to throw around words like the government and the masses like they actually mean something or are monolith entites.

 

[FiReSTaRT]

you guys like to throw around words like the government and the masses like they actually mean something or are monolith entites.

They can be treated as such.. Get a bunch of people in a mob and they adopt herd mentality, acting as one and being a lot more predictable than individuals. As for the governments.. That's what's becoming more prominent in our society, even though it's not as much as in the US. They are in the pockets of certain corporate interests, and whichever of the 2 parties is in power, it's going to push the same essential policies, benefiting their unofficial employers. After they retire from public service, many public officials get plum consulting "jobs" with the corporations whose interests they represented through their policy decisions. Some (in cases of Italy and Chile and also during the Bush reign in the US) also own significant stock in corporations that are beneficiaries of official government policy.

 

[OpenGambit]

They can be treated as such.. Get a bunch of people in a mob and they adopt herd mentality, acting as one and being a lot more predictable than individuals. As for the governments.. That's what's becoming more prominent in our society, even though it's not as much as in the US. They are in the pockets of certain corporate interests, and whichever of the 2 parties is in power, it's going to push the same essential policies, benefiting their unofficial employers. After they retire from public service, many public officials get plum consulting "jobs" with the corporations whose interests they represented through their policy decisions. Some (in cases of Italy and Chile and also during the Bush reign in the US) also own significant stock in corporations that are beneficiaries of official government policy.

too bad this has nothing to do with SOPA and nothing in SOPA has anything to do with what you are talking about nor does it support that world view.

 

[FiReSTaRT]

too bad this has nothing to do with SOPA and nothing in SOPA has anything to do with what you are talking about nor does it support that world view.

It does.. The US government is sacrificing long-term interest of their entire society, even other societies, in order to cater to corporate interests because their system equates corporate interests with national interests.

 

[OpenGambit]

It does.. The US government is sacrificing long-term interest of their entire society, even other societies, in order to cater to corporate interests because their system equates corporate interests with national interests.

because the entities that opposed SOPA weren't among the biggest corporations on the planet... way to ignore the facts.

 

[FiReSTaRT]

because the entities that opposed SOPA weren't among the biggest corporations on the planet... way to ignore the facts.

Corporations have opposing interests.. Those golfing the politicians to introduce crap like SOPA can work against those whose interests may lie in protecting the freedom of expression or being able to use cloud storage services for their corporate data. I'll give you a specific example.

In Canada, in order to protect their declining TV revenues and prevent cord-cutting, Bell decided to introduce Usage Based Billing for Internet services to our market. So, they took Finkster and his entourage golfing and the CRTC was ready to rubber-stamp it, after pretending to listen to the public. Usage Based Billing would have put Netflix in a bit of a pickle just as their CDN business was taking off, so they did a bit of their own golfing, which, combined with a HUGE public stink from the CDN public put that idea to sleep. Corporations can be at odds with each other.

 

[OpenGambit]

Corporations have opposing interests.. Those golfing the politicians to introduce crap like SOPA can work against those whose interests may lie in protecting the freedom of expression or being able to use cloud storage services for their corporate data. I'll give you a specific example.

In Canada, in order to protect their declining TV revenues and prevent cord-cutting, Bell decided to introduce Usage Based Billing for Internet services to our market. So, they took Finkster and his entourage golfing and the CRTC was ready to rubber-stamp it, after pretending to listen to the public. Usage Based Billing would have put Netflix in a bit of a pickle just as their CDN business was taking off, so they did a bit of their own golfing, which, combined with a HUGE public stink from the CDN public put that idea to sleep. Corporations can be at odds with each other.

oh so first its US catering to corporate interest like its one thing, and now its corporations opposing each other.

 

[FiReSTaRT]

oh so first its US catering to corporate interest like its one thing, and now its corporations opposing each other.

You can have both in the society.. Downloading corporate taxes onto the middle class is in the interest of the entire corporate world. Corporate-friendly eminent domain laws where Google can kick me off the land where I buried my grandpa in order to build a server farm are another example. There won't be any corporations spending any money on golfing the politicians in order to prevent those. However, if a city is on the fence between a subway system and just adding buses, you can expect for Bombardier and Mercedes to be golfing the politicians with opposite goals.

 

[OpenGambit]

if you actually tried to make one point rather than just going all over the place spewing buzz words, you might end up with a coherent point.

and you have no idea how corporate tax works in the U.S.

 

[FiReSTaRT]

if you actually tried to make one point rather than just going all over the place spewing buzz words, you might end up with a coherent point.

and you have no idea how corporate tax works in the U.S.

This is a semi-open discussion and not a legal brief so we are allowed to get a little off topic. You'll figure that out as you spend more time on Internet forums

Forum Sponsor