The chickenfarmer's lament

[Reginald Ret]

Once there was a chickenfarmer.
He was the only chickenfarmer in town.
He supplied the entire town with eggs for their breakfast and was loved and respected for this.
He also got rich as fuck.

Then one day a freak wind blew a newspaper into the town square.
It was from the town 75 miles east.
On the front page was a big picture of a chicken with a funny hat!
And the caption read: 'NEW FAD: HAVING A PET CHICKEN!'

So all the important people started to have their own chickens.
And soon everyone had a chicken of their own, from rich to poor and from all walks of life.
If they had a square feet of land, they had a chicken.
Some even had a chicken locked inside their mobile home.

Ofcourse, the chickens did what chickens do.
They made many, many chicken eggs.
The people soon learned that they no longer had to pay for breakfast eggs!
The people Rejoiced!

What do you expect the chickenfarmer did?
Did he accept that people no longer wanted to buy his eggs?
No he did not.
Instead he sent his thugs over to intimidate the people into still paying him for their breakfast eggs.


Luckily the chickenfarmer soon ran out of money and had to stop trying to sell eggs.
Instead he changed focus to only selling chicken meat.
What a smart man this farmer was!









PS  the eggs are music and the farmer is a musician.

[Doktor Howl]

Well, yeah, except that people pirating music aren't making music.  They're stealing it.

[Reginald Ret]

Stealing requires the victim to lose something.
The chickenfarmer, like the musician, isn't losing anything but potential income.
Do you think the chickenfarmer has the right to keep the villagers from having their own chicken?

One does not have a right to potential income.
If i am selling my TV and it is really worth $200, but i don't know that and i sell it for $100.
Do i get to sue the buyer?

[Remington]

Well, yeah, except that people pirating music aren't making music.  They're stealing it.

Piracy != stealing. Stealing removes the original, piracy merely makes a copy.

Also, studies suggest that large-scale piracy of a musician's works is actually financially better for them. Piracy results in lower record sales and higher concert attendance, as more people have heard the musician and would pay to see him/her live. Recording companies get most of the profits from records/CDs, whereas musicians get a lot more of the profits from live concerts.

Hence, piracy helps the musicians and hurts the recording companies.

[Doktor Howl]

Stealing requires the victim to lose something.

Yes, the profits from their work.

[Doktor Howl]

Well, yeah, except that people pirating music aren't making music.  They're stealing it.

Just sayin.

Wow.  My argument is totally destroyed by an innaccurate graphic.

Making the copy denies the artist - or the owner of the rights - the profits from their work or investment.  That's theft, plain and simple.

[Remington]

Well, yeah, except that people pirating music aren't making music.  They're stealing it.

Just sayin.

Wow.  My argument is totally destroyed by an innaccurate graphic.

Making the copy denies the artist - or the owner of the rights - the profits from their work or investment.  That's theft, plain and simple.

Revised post.

[Doktor Howl]

Basically, if I make an invention, patent it, and market it, you guys are okay with the idea of someone simply copying it?

I guess we - at least in America - can just eliminate a clause from article I, sec 8 of the constitution, and then we can all have fun emulating the shining success that is Bulgaria.

[Reginald Ret]

Well, yeah, except that people pirating music aren't making music.  They're stealing it.

img http://www.devtopics.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/piracyisnottheft.jpg
Just sayin.

Wow.  My argument is totally destroyed by an innaccurate graphic.

Making the copy denies the artist - or the owner of the rights - the profits from their work or investment.  That's theft, plain and simple.

That's a loss of potential income.
You do not have a right to potential income.
You only have a right to try to get as much income as you can, you don't actually have the right to get all you can.

If i am selling my TV and it is really worth $200, but i don't know that and i sell it for $100.
Do i get to sue the buyer?

i think you missed that bit.

PS pic did not help, pic is oversimplification. It may be true for your(and my) world view, but you are not talking to yourself: you are talking to people who disagree with you on this issue. They have a different view on the subject and will not be swayed(sp?) by smart pics or pithy one-liners. it will require making actual arguments, and even then you may not succeed.


(posted while i was typing, adding response to this)

Basically, if I make an invention, patent it, and market it, you guys are okay with the idea of someone simply copying it?

I guess we - at least in America - can just eliminate a clause from article I, sec 8 of the constitution, and then we can all have fun emulating the shining success that is Bulgaria.

Things will change drastically if my views on this are applied widely.
To be honest, i have no clue how the inventor's/artist's motivations will be effected.
But i think my reasoning is solid, so it is worth a try.

[Doktor Howl]

That's a loss of potential income.
You do not have a right to potential income.

Okay, so it is your position that intellectual property does not exist?

[Doktor Howl]

Also, you have the right to chase potential profit:  Nobody guarantees that people will buy your product.

But to have people take it without paying for it?  Theft.

[Eater of Clowns]

farmer = musician, eggs = music

Begs the question - Who's the cock?

[Doktor Howl]

farmer = musician, eggs = music

Begs the question - Who's the cock?

The initial analogy doesn't hold water anyway, unless all the "villagers" are making their own music.

[Eater of Clowns]

farmer = musician, eggs = music

Begs the question - Who's the cock?

The initial analogy doesn't hold water anyway, unless all the "villagers" are making their own music.

Maybe if the villagers genuinely believe their chickens don't create unique eggs, only exact copies of the farmer's eggs?

Okay, sorry, no more playing stretch the metaphor game.

[Doktor Howl]

Basically, if I make an invention, patent it, and market it, you guys are okay with the idea of someone simply copying it?

I guess we - at least in America - can just eliminate a clause from article I, sec 8 of the constitution, and then we can all have fun emulating the shining success that is Bulgaria.

Things will change drastically if my views on this are applied widely.
To be honest, i have no clue how the inventor's/artist's motivations will be effected.
But i think my reasoning is solid, so it is worth a try.

Yeah, they'll change drastically.  It's called Bulgaria.  See above.