The chickenfarmer's lament

[Triple Zero]

The argument "it's stealing because the artist loses potential profits" only holds if the artist was going to make profit if their media was not pirated.

That is, if person X would not or could not pirate music Y, they would have bought it.

If the person wasn't going to buy the music in the first place, if they couldn't get hold of it for free, where are the lost profits?

I'd say over 95% of my mp3 collection falls into this category. Yes that means my entire music collection would have been 20 times smaller if I couldn't pirate that. In either case for that 95% the artists make exactly the same amount of money, regardless of whether I was pirating or not. The only thing they're losing out on is free advertising when I play music to my friends I otherwise would not be able to.

For the remaining 5%, I usually end up buying them in the end. Although sometimes years after I originally downloaded the MP3s (as the songs grow on you, I realize their value?)

But really, in order to argue that piracy = lost profits = stealing, you gotta show there are lost profits in the first place.

And believe it or not, that's not as clear-cut as you'd think it is.

BTW I do also agree that the chicken analogy in the OP doesn't hold

[AFK]

So if you really don't like 95% of your music collection that much.  Why do you still have it? 

[Doktor Howl]

The argument "it's stealing because the artist loses potential profits" only holds if the artist was going to make profit if their media was not pirated.

Actually, I said "artist or investor".  Intellectual property is just like any other property.

[LMNO]

Is there a difference between stealing a band's music online, and sneaking into a concert they're playing?

In both cases, the band has decided that if you want to hear their music, you have to pay for it.

[Reginald Ret]

Yes, but i consider loyalty and friendship of higher importance than my opinion on IP.
You won't have to worry about me abusing any of your work.
Philosphical talk is great fun, but not as important as real people.
I don't pirate from my friends if they don't want me to.

So pirating IS wrong?

Going against the wishes of your friends is wrong.
I have no loyalty to outsiders/unknowns. i won't kill them and i will give them a hand if they need a little help but i will not worry about their opinion of me.
I must follow my own principles. I am willing to adapt to my friend's principles but i can't go around adapting to every single person on the planet, that would be silly.

Information does not act the same as physical produce.
Applying the same rules to both hurts at least one of them.

Bullshit.  If people cannot own their own body of work, and determine it's distribution, then why fucking bother?

Because they like to create?
They will earn some money from the edge of having it first?
It may get them noticed by talent-scouts?
music specific: the freely given music touches millions of people and they want to see you perform or want your merchandise.

forcing people to treat the physical as information is bad (communism, where every physical thing must be shared by all)

wut

and forcing people to treat information as a physical object is bad (we know how to make clean water and instead of sharing that with 3rd world countries, we will demand all their money in exchange for a limited right of use.)

3rd world countries don't know how to boil water?   

Boilingwon't work: it requires a lot of fuel so they would soon run out.
I was thinking about sewage treatment. That takes a bit more than just boiling.
IIRC it takes several filters (some low tech(sand) and some high tech) and carefully controlled microbiological ecologies.

Let's just simplify this:  Inventors and artists are less than human, and can have their work exploited without compensation.  Because I want free stuff.

There.  The pro-piracy argument, stripped of all the bullshit rationalizations.

No.
Like every other person they get to try to make money as long as they do it without resorting to violence.
Violence is only acceptable to defend their own life, the life of another person and to keep their possesions from being taken away.
What are copyrights?  the right to use state violence against people who have not hurt you and have taken nothing away from you.

What you say would be more true if the artists and inventors were the ones profiting from selling reproductions of their work, rather than exploitative labels.

Musicians rarely profit from sales of their music. They profit from concerts. So yeah, in principle what you're saying is true, but in practice what Regret is saying is true, even though the chicken farmer metaphor doesn't work at all.

From a point of principle, there's no difference between pirating from Decca or having someone mass produce your wooden robot and sell it at WalMart without your permission or compensation.

Either you own your intellectual property, or you don't.

Well put.
This discussion is about wether intellectual property should be treated the same as physical property.
It is all too easy to drift off into discussing something else entirely.

The argument "it's stealing because the artist loses potential profits" only holds if the artist was going to make profit if their media was not pirated.

Actually, I said "artist or investor".  Intellectual property is just like any other property.

Is there a difference between stealing a band's music online, and sneaking into a concert they're playing?

In both cases, the band has decided that if you want to hear their music, you have to pay for it.

Yes:
One is making a copy of a copy of a (stolen or bought) copy.
The other is entering a private area without permission.

That reminds me.
The way it is now you are not buying music.
You are buying the use of music.
Because if you actually bought the music you should be allowed to do whatever you want with it. (except shatter the cd and stab someone with the pieces. but even then it isn't the way you use the music that is unethical, the hurting someone bit is the bad bit.)

[Doktor Howl]

Is there a difference between stealing a band's music online, and sneaking into a concert they're playing?

In both cases, the band has decided that if you want to hear their music, you have to pay for it.

One also involves trespassing.

[LMNO]

Is there a difference between stealing a band's music online, and sneaking into a concert they're playing?

In both cases, the band has decided that if you want to hear their music, you have to pay for it.

Yes:
One is making a copy of a copy of a (stolen or bought) copy. without permission.
The other is entering a private area without permission.

Still can't see a difference.

[Doktor Howl]

Yes, but i consider loyalty and friendship of higher importance than my opinion on IP.
You won't have to worry about me abusing any of your work.
Philosphical talk is great fun, but not as important as real people.
I don't pirate from my friends if they don't want me to.

So pirating IS wrong?

Going against the wishes of your friends is wrong.
I have no loyalty to outsiders/unknowns. i won't kill them and i will give them a hand if they need a little help but i will not worry about their opinion of me.
I must follow my own principles. I am willing to adapt to my friend's principles but i can't go around adapting to every single person on the planet, that would be silly.

So you admit that pirating my comic, for example, would cause me enough grief as to make it wrong?

Information does not act the same as physical produce.
Applying the same rules to both hurts at least one of them.

Bullshit.  If people cannot own their own body of work, and determine it's distribution, then why fucking bother?

Because they like to create?

Ask Nigel if she makes beads because she likes to create.  Also, from a purely economic standpoint, there is harmful for a person to be an artist, if they don't own the body of their work, to sell as they see fit.  It's a huge investment of time, that would be better off, you know, making the rent.

Let's just simplify this:  Inventors and artists are less than human, and can have their work exploited without compensation.  Because I want free stuff.

There.  The pro-piracy argument, stripped of all the bullshit rationalizations.

No.
Like every other person they get to try to make money as long as they do it without resorting to violence.
Violence is only acceptable to defend their own life, the life of another person and to keep their possesions from being taken away.
What are copyrights?  the right to use state violence against people who have not hurt you and have taken nothing away from you.

Courts are violent?  Okay, by the same logic, I just decide to move into your living room.  Get me out without using violence, "state violence" or otherwise.  After all, you can't be using the entire living room at the same time, right?

[Doktor Howl]

Frankly, I find the idea that music, art, etc, I may create going automatically and without my permission to be public domain to be offensive as hell.

I also find the notion that I'd put that much effort into something "for the sheer joy of creating it" to also be as offensive as hell.

It says that an artist (of whatever type) is less human than someone who makes tangible objects for a living.

In other words, in terms of rights, someone who manufactures napalm is of more value to civilization than artists are.

If that's the world you want, if that's the existence and culture you're willing to tolerate in order to avoid paying $0.79/song for your Ipod, then you deserve the world we live in, because it's that same attitude that got us where we are today...ie, cultural pursuits are of tertiary interest, after impliments of warfare, stuffing your face with junk food, and cheap plastic crap from China.

Congratulations, monkeys!  But at least you filled your Ipod for cheap.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I want to take a moment to explore the idea that stealing (pirating) from a friend is "wrong", but stealing from a stranger is not wrong. What happens if we extrapolate that to other forms of transgression?

[LMNO]

Surprise buttsex?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Surprise buttsex?

Yes, among other things!

What happens when a nation practices that kind of morality?

[LMNO]

We carpetbomb Baghdad?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

We carpetbomb Baghdad?

Dingdingdindingding!

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I think we may be onto the root of all evil, here.