Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cyberguy34000
We're not looking at a moral issue here, we're looking at an economic one.
Sometimes people lose out when new tech, or a new economic idea comes around, they can either adapt or die. That's life in the free-market world of capitalism. We could have outlawed the light bulb because the candle making trade was going to be annihilated, or we could have outlawed cars because they put horse-breeders at risk. We could have done it, and kept those wonderful people employed in what they do best, but society as a whole would be denied these things. Legislating this stuff, while it does ensure people don't get brushed aside by the brutal pace of technology, just puts a freeze on tech growth and innovation, and denies society as a whole of many wonderful things.
P2P networking is very dangerous to business models based upon large production costs to produce a final product (such as Hollywood films), however the practically zero distribution costs means that small groups that can produce quality content can easily cast their net much wider than they could before. Meaning that if this became a normally acceptable thing in society, that large businesses and non-physical distribution chains have just about everything to lose... While small mobile businesses and individual creators have everything to gain and profit from. (Read "The World is Flat" if you want to explore this idea)
It isn't stealing. Stealing is when you deprive someone of their property. When a resource is infinite (as this technology makes things), than I consider hording that resource all to yourself, dictating who is to use it, for what purpose, and in what way is morally wrong.
The RIAA will do everything in their power to kill this stuff, because it ultimately means doom for them and the companies they represent. Now we can let the free-markets take their course, and have new innovative companies and ideas spring to life to take their place and make everything better overall, or we can put a freeze on technology so that these people and companies remain in power and any upsetting ideas are made illegal.
Your choice.
|
You make some good points however misguided. The RIAA is protecting what belongs to them. It is no different than your team making a part for your robot and me coming to your pit area and taking it. Or take IFI for example. You are provided with a part (control system) You own the box, however the intellectual property belongs to IFI. You do not have the right to copy or reproduce without their permission. Now if you feel that it is OK to copy and reproduce, IFI will lose it's revenue stream. That means an increase to all of the legal owners as the increase costs (development & production/ purchases = cost to company) are passed on so that the company can survive. Eventually, as Al stated so well, it will not pay and the company will shut down production. Now we are all losers. The reasons for patents and copyrights are to protect those that spend the money to develop the product. The fact that others don't take the chances, have the inability, or are just to lazy to produce their own material should not minimize the work of the industrious, intelligent and hard workers.
Basically if you reproduce any copyrighted/ patented material without the express written permission of those holding the rights then you are a basic common thief. There is no other way to look at it. It is no different than breaking into a house and stealing the contents, using someone else's credit card without their permission, or taking parts from some other teams pit area. It is black and white. You either have the rights or not. You may not like what I say, but as of now, that is the law.