Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Posts 101 to 150 of 192
  1. #101

    User Info Menu

    Rob the rich to feed the poor...Hmmm, I seem to have seen that in a movie or two somewhere. The lead was a fat Australian too. Before him, a fat American.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #102
    just reviving this thread because I've had to file copyright notices (DMCA) against scribd 3x in the last year. They are basically doing the same thing napster and facebook do. They try to claim they are not responsible and that they are basically just providing the equivalent of social media for books.

    One good thing is that the DMCA processing is now streamlined with a form and the last 2 times I filed one, the illegally copied work was taken down within 24 hours.

  4. #103

    User Info Menu

    I started readng this thread not realizing that it was four years old. I’d like to state two points;
    1) I’m sorry you were cheated like this Jack.
    2) It is amazing to me how many people are just fucking idiots and my heart burns with hatred for them.
    Ignorance is agony.



  5. #104
    Thanks Brother. It was horrifying to me that folks were defending the "right" to pirate someone else's work when I posted about this 4 years ago.

    Quote Originally Posted by whiskey02 View Post
    I started readng this thread not realizing that it was four years old. I’d like to state two points;
    1) I’m sorry you were cheated like this Jack.
    2) It is amazing to me how many people are just fucking idiots and my heart burns with hatred for them.

  6. #105

    User Info Menu

    Sorry to hear that Jack, there's a lot of free loading pricks in the world.

    Actually - not even that. Just thoughtless people.

  7. #106

    User Info Menu

    And yet the likes of Universal Music Group etc seem to have no problem issuing instant copyright strikes against music educators like Rick Beato, Adam Neely and so on, who really adding some value.

  8. #107
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    And yet the likes of Universal Music Group etc seem to have no problem issuing instant copyright strikes against music educators like Rick Beato, Adam Neely and so on, who really adding some value.
    didn't know about that. fill me in please!

  9. #108

    User Info Menu

    I discovered some of my material on Scribd, I filed a complaint and the stuff was removed. Its a drag that someone would actually think its was cool to pirate and give away a part of my lively-hood.

    tim

  10. #109

    User Info Menu

    Just went back on and looked, found two more violations. filed a complaint and we'll see.

  11. #110

    User Info Menu

    Hmms -!! I am often looking for "stuff" and find myself being led to scribd. How as a consumer can I tell if the material being offered is being offered in respect of the producers rights ? As a content producer myself I am very sensitive to the possibility of violating a producers rights. I just assumed scribd content was fine given its subscription model and that part of that subscription income was going to the producers.

    Will

  12. #111
    i don't think you have to be a rocket scientist to figure out if something is pirated. If it's got a publisher's name and a price, it probably shouldn't be on there. I have alerted dozens of friends of mine to pirated work being hosted there. They try to use napster's excuse. I hope they get shut down.

  13. #112

    User Info Menu

    I guess I am both naive and not a rocket scientist - multiple lessons learned

  14. #113

    User Info Menu

    Basically any material on scribd that you would normally pay money for is probably dodgy.

  15. #114

    User Info Menu

    I work in an academic library and spend a lot of time dealing with copyright and plagiarism issues. There are huge problems with electronic publications being pirated. Anyone seen -- Sci-Hub? They steal peer-reviewed scientific articles by pinching institutional logins in order to bypass paywalls. They then store papers on their own repository in Russia.

  16. #115

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    And yet the likes of Universal Music Group etc seem to have no problem issuing instant copyright strikes against music educators like Rick Beato, Adam Neely and so on, who really adding some value.

    The copyright law on use for education is for government schools not private and individuals like Beato.

  17. #116
    It is a good thing that the op managed to get his book off the website so fast. But piracy shouldn't really surprise anyone, there are entire countries where the whole concept of intellectual property is practically nonexistent, and you see pirated material openly sold on stores, let alone on the internet. Alas, the whole music streaming situation, with the revenues it currently pays is practically close to piracy

  18. #117

    User Info Menu


  19. #118

    User Info Menu

    This really sucks, and individual authors probably have no real options other than to request that each pirated piece be removed.

    I'm wondering what it would take to get say, 500 authors together for a class action lawsuit. Ultimately, that's probably the only way to actually solve this problem. Money talks...

  20. #119
    Quote Originally Posted by Alter View Post
    It is a good thing that the op managed to get his book off the website so fast. But piracy shouldn't really surprise anyone, there are entire countries where the whole concept of intellectual property is practically nonexistent, and you see pirated material openly sold on stores, let alone on the internet. Alas, the whole music streaming situation, with the revenues it currently pays is practically close to piracy
    I wasn't posting this because piracy surprised me. I posted it just to vent and to warn people that they should think twice about downloading works off places like scribd because when you do, you are shortchanging the authors. I've literally put hundreds of hours into my books, not to mention all the practice time that went into even the concepts and development of the ideas. So when folks download someone's work for free, they are really telling the authors not to bother with printed books.

  21. #120

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by NoReply View Post
    The copyright law on use for education is for government schools not private and individuals like Beato.
    Where does it say that? I don't want to get into a political pissing contest, but I think that was a very misguided statement.

    Have you watched any of Beato's "What Makes This Song Great?" videos. I don't see how any reasonable person could consider what he's doing a copyright infringement or in any way causing financial damage to the copyright holder. This is quite different from taking a person's hard work and distributing it for free. Or worse, taking someone's work and reselling it, which also occurs frequently on the Internet.

    On the one hand you have people who suffer very real financial damage from copyright infringement. On the other you have people shooting themselves in the foot by not allowing anyone to use even a snippet of their music to be used in an educational video.

  22. #121
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack E Blue View Post
    This is quite different from taking a person's hard work and distributing it for free. Or worse, taking someone's work and reselling it, which also occurs frequently on the Internet.
    that's exactly what scribd does. They charge a monthly subscription fee and then look the other way when the majority of the uploaded material is owned by someone else. Yes, the allow authors to fill out a DMCA but why the **** do they not just have someone review all uploads and anything that is a commercial title get rejected?

  23. #122

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack E Blue View Post
    Where does it say that? I don't want to get into a political pissing contest, but I think that was a very misguided statement.
    I worked for multiple schools so from experience.

  24. #123

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    that's exactly what scribd does. They charge a monthly subscription fee and then look the other way when the majority of the uploaded material is owned by someone else. Yes, the allow authors to fill out a DMCA but why the **** do they not just have someone review all uploads and anything that is a commercial title get rejected?
    That might be section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, in the US at least. Websites aren't regarded as the publishers of user generated content and are not held responsible.

    Law was made in 1996 when the internet was just getting started. It needs updating in terms of commercial and copyright.

    If all the reviews on Yelp were fake nobody could touch them for that, the law protects them. Only on a marketing angle for inaccurately claiming they are customer reviews.

    Copyright is DMCA of course, which still doesn't make websites responsible for infringing User Generated Content.

  25. #124

    User Info Menu

    The world is big... think about people somehwere who need to save money for a year to buy your work and for whom your work may be a breakthrough or a great support.
    Or those who would never be able to purchase your new CD and your music could make them happier? Isn't it a reward?
    Most musician I know are happy when they are doaloaded even for free becasue they are happy someone listens to them.

    I am always there to support an artist. I try to buy even when I can download - but I can afford it. That's where my conciousness comes from - I can afford it. It's very simple... when you are hungry and you cannot afford food you steal it or starve to death.... that's where the conciousness is rooted.

    But I hate that copyright crap...
    mostly it's there to protect Hollywood producers and IT companies, to protect their speculations on the market...
    not the artists.

    I think it should only protect an authorship and that's it.

    I think goverments and different funds should invest money into it and cover expences to make it common and accesable for everyone.
    So that the artist would be able to maintain his family and those who cannot afford byuing - still would have access to his works.

  26. #125

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah View Post
    The world is big... think about people somehwere who need to save money for a year to buy your work and for whom your work may be a breakthrough or a great support.
    Or those who would never be able to purchase your new CD and your music could make them happier? Isn't it a reward?
    Most musician I know are happy when they are doaloaded even for free becasue they are happy someone listens to them.

    I am always there to support an artist. I try to buy even when I can download - but I can afford it. That's where my conciousness comes from - I can afford it. It's very simple... when you are hungry and you cannot afford food you steal it or starve to death.... that's where the conciousness is rooted.

    But I hate that copyright crap...
    mostly it's there to protect Hollywood producers and IT companies, to protect their speculations on the market...
    not the artists.

    I think it should only protect an authorship and that's it.

    I think goverments and different funds should invest money into it and cover expences to make it common and accesable for everyone.
    So that the artist would be able to maintain his family and those who cannot afford byuing - still would have access to his works.
    Poor people want gainful employment. Never mind copyright.

    Music / guitar is one route that many people who regardless of their background have worked hard at and succeeded. Starting with a rich background or needing money e.g. to pay for a degree, not needed.

    It's not as close to "sticking it the man" as one might think, particularly not nowadays where large companies don't have as much grip over industry. The distribution fee I pay is 15%, I get 85% minus the same amount any sized company would pay the retail channel.

  27. #126

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Arpeggio View Post
    Poor people want gainful employment. Never mind copyright.
    Market is international but the prices are in dollars in correspondence to American (and more or less Western European countries) market.

    These people may be not that poor in their countries.

    The thing is that alimentary products are mostly local. Appliances, cars and many other products like furniture, clothes are often localized for the market demands of the region and country.

    But if you want to buy Peter Bernstein CD being in Pakhistan, Moldova, Armenia (or even in Russia) you will have to buy it form the US with delivery for the US price.


    Though I hate Scridb too... because they are no better - earning more money from it.

  28. #127

    User Info Menu

    One suggestion, just based on skimming this thread...

    Take more details when selling your product. That way you may be able to somewhat track where it ends up, or who could have pirated it.

    Also, as annoying as it may be, search your books on a regular basis online for this. If it's costing you 50% in sales, I'd say that it's worth it.

  29. #128

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah View Post
    The world is big... think about people somehwere who need to save money for a year to buy your work and for whom your work may be a breakthrough or a great support.
    Or those who would never be able to purchase your new CD and your music could make them happier? Isn't it a reward?
    Most musician I know are happy when they are doaloaded even for free becasue they are happy someone listens to them.

    I am always there to support an artist. I try to buy even when I can download - but I can afford it. That's where my conciousness comes from - I can afford it. It's very simple... when you are hungry and you cannot afford food you steal it or starve to death.... that's where the conciousness is rooted.

    But I hate that copyright crap...
    mostly it's there to protect Hollywood producers and IT companies, to protect their speculations on the market...
    not the artists.

    I think it should only protect an authorship and that's it.

    I think goverments and different funds should invest money into it and cover expences to make it common and accesable for everyone.
    So that the artist would be able to maintain his family and those who cannot afford byuing - still would have access to his works.
    How much those CDs and books costs?? A fortune?? You gotta pay for the artists work, period, no discussion!
    I don't care where you live and how much you earn, you gotta respect someone else property, and the music produced by artists is their property.

    OK, one thing you managed to get a free copy of something and use it for yourself... Fine, you lucked out, enjoy! But then you wanna share it with the world too? So everyone can have it for free too, and screw the author? That's a malicious BS and have absolutely no sympathy for those assholes.

    I'm guilty, I used to download music and movies for free, but I'm no longer doing it. I don't mind paying $10 for an album on iTunes or better else directly from the source, it's my pleasure. I'm in the same boat, I produce music too, and if I get a successful product, I wanna make sure I'm gonna get paid.

    Taking a music biz class in college was eye opening in this respect. My professor said, ok guys, you are going to be pros in music, or at least you that's what you here for. If you still looking for free shit, think about it- you shooting yourself in the foot!

  30. #129
    Thank you Anton. The idea that someone is impoverished and therefore it's ok to steal whatever they want and then this statement,

    "Most musician I know are happy when they are doaloaded even for free becasue they are happy someone listens to them."

    Are among the most ridiculous excuses for bad behavior I've heard in a long time.

  31. #130
    I think this sums it up pretty well...

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Thompson

    dont even get me going on this. I have so many friends and associates in the industry who have worked their butts off over many years developing systems for instruction, then publish themselves or through a publisher, only to see the product pirated away on sites like Scribd. The attitude that "music should be free" or "exposure is good for you" pisses me off so much that I cant even contain myself. Welcome to the downside of technology... its just too bad that lawsuits for copyright infringement cant be effectively enforced regarding these transgressions. Technically, posting copyrighted material on the internet without permission is wire fraud, which makes it a US federal offence, with heavy fines and jail time. If only it could be enforced. Its one reason I havent published my own products yet. Currently I have four titles targeting a few different demographics (heavy theory stuff, some blues turnaround things, a chord construction thing and a jazz tunes analysis thing) Ive been researching ways to keep my manufacturing costs to an absolute minimum to offset the losses I KNOW I will incur, caused by the assholes who will rip me off. A while back, I had my intellectual properties lawyer contact Scribd about some Lenny Breau oriented instructional sheets I did for my clinics. They were posted within two days of the clinic. They took it down, but he said its like plugging a leak in the dike with your finger...almost futile. Human nature, alas. Situational morality reigns supreme. Sucks...

  32. #131

    User Info Menu

    Scribd makes money, but what do the people uploading the content receive?
    White belt
    My Youtube

  33. #132

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    Thank you Anton. The idea that someone is impoverished and therefore it's ok to steal whatever they want and then this statement,

    "Most musician I know are happy when they are doaloaded even for free becasue they are happy someone listens to them."

    Are among the most ridiculous excuses for bad behavior I've heard in a long time.
    I respect your authorship, jzucker.

    I just think that this system is wrong.

  34. #133
    I think there are some pragmatic approaches to working around problems with pirating content in 2018, and there are certainly conversations to be had about "the system". But those are kind of separate from whether it's ok to steal music from a content producer.

    Anyway, seems like all of those are getting mixed together in a confusing way in this thread - the whole way through, from the beginning.

    Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

  35. #134

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive View Post
    How much those CDs and books costs?? A fortune?? You gotta pay for the artists work, period, no discussion!
    I don't care where you live and how much you earn, you gotta respect someone else property, and the music produced by artists is their property.

    OK, one thing you managed to get a free copy of something and use it for yourself... Fine, you lucked out, enjoy! But then you wanna share it with the world too? So everyone can have it for free too, and screw the author? That's a malicious BS and have absolutely no sympathy for those assholes.

    I'm guilty, I used to download music and movies for free, but I'm no longer doing it. I don't mind paying $10 for an album on iTunes or better else directly from the source, it's my pleasure. I'm in the same boat, I produce music too, and if I get a successful product, I wanna make sure I'm gonna get paid.

    Taking a music biz class in college was eye opening in this respect. My professor said, ok guys, you are going to be pros in music, or at least you that's what you here for. If you still looking for free shit, think about it- you shooting yourself in the foot!
    No, not period. And emotional exclamations do not solve the problem.

    It's not that simple.
    Culture of copyright is strongly connected with local economical and social conditions, with local market and how this market is related to global market and other markets.
    You can't exclaim: Oh a CD! I does not cost fortune... not for you but for someone there - yes. There are coundtries where good lunch costs 50cents and monthly salary is 50 bucks.. locally they are not poor, but they cannot afford American CD for 15 dollars.
    This market is not localized.

    I am not emotional.

    Of course scribd is disgusting. First because they take money, second because they do not control the quality what is being uploaded.

    Artists should be paid and rewarded of course but how?

    We should not be short-sighted because the other side of it is good art that does not sell well.
    It may seem paradoxal but the artists that do not sell well have the same problem as the artists that are pirated.

    Both are not getting paid for their work.
    Don't quote this part with saying ' but the reasons that they are not paid are different'

    Because this is what I call 'short-sighted'.

    The reason is the same: market (so called free market, though of course it is not free).

    I think art should be supported and paid by rich people, states, universities. I would have made a tax for art so that everyone who does not work in artistic area would pay it.

    And no stupid market and sales competion, let the salesmen sell Coke and Fords...

  36. #135

    User Info Menu

    But those are kind of separate from whether it's ok to steal music from a content producer.
    Here's exactly what I wrote

    I am always there to support an artist. I try to buy even when I can download - but I can afford it. That's where my conciousness comes from - I can afford it. It's very simple... when you are hungry and you cannot afford food you steal it or starve to death.... that's where the conciousness is rooted.
    I see that people do not want to read and think.

    PS
    Not meaning you but it looked as if I supported stealing thanks to how my words were interpreted.

  37. #136
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah View Post
    I respect your authorship, jzucker.

    I just think that this system is wrong.
    just because the system is wrong doesn't give you the right to steal my work simply because you can't afford it. And it certainly doesn't give you the right to upload my work to file-sharing sites.

    Your desire to have my work for free doesn't outweigh my necessity to be compensated for my work.

  38. #137

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    just because the system is wrong doesn't give you the right to steal my work simply because you can't afford it. And it certainly doesn't give you the right to upload my work to file-sharing sites.

    Your desire to have my work for free doesn't outweigh my necessity to be compensated for my work.
    Why me? I did not still your work and have no intention to do it.

    If speaking for others ... presumably those who cant afford it. ...

    The point is they do not want to have your work for free. They just want to have it. It's too simple... either they have it now or after a year (or most probably never ... because they fond another solution. I'd prefer they use my work for free than never use it because they cant pay it . Call it steal if you want I let them steal if it helps ) .

    It's ok for me.. what about idiots who can pay it and still take it for free... well how can I help it?

    By the way... Why do you want to be compensated for your work so much? Is it really why you did that work? I mean I am not against it but what kind of work is it?

  39. #138
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah View Post

    By the way... Why do you want to be compensated for your work so much? Is it really why you did that work? I mean I am not against it but what kind of work is it?
    assuming you have a job, why does anyone want to be compensated for their job? SMH!

  40. #139

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah View Post

    By the way... Why do you want to be compensated for your work so much? Is it really why you did that work? I mean I am not against it but what kind of work is it?
    Musicians... why do they want to get paid at all? Total weirdos! Well, at least you're 'not against it', like 'shut up and feel lucky you get any money at all from music' or 'get a real job' kind of thing... Very good, thank you for keepin it real!

  41. #140
    Or those who would never be able to purchase your new CD and your music could make them happier? Isn't it a reward?
    Most musician I know are happy when they are doaloaded even for free becasue they are happy someone listens to them.
    By the way... Why do you want to be compensated for your work so much? Is it really why you did that work? I mean I am not against it but what kind of work is it?
    I think if someone endorses this opinion, it should hold true for all professions. Doctors should work for free, and for the well being of humanity, the bus driver should get you home for free contributing to a traffic free urban environment, people in supermarkets should work for free, your plumber should come at your house for free, free organic meals for all, no rent or taxes paid, free education and pension plans etc..

    Music is not an essential commodity in the way water, electricity, housing etc are. Nor is art a lesser endeavor that should not be rewarded, or only supported by the rich. Poverty and social injustice are an undeniable fact, but a poor argument to justify intellectual theft in my opinion.
    Last edited by Alter; 05-16-2018 at 07:26 PM.

  42. #141

    User Info Menu

    I think if someone endorses this opinion, it should hold true for all professions.
    No.. for me artistic professions are special.

    Most people hate their job, so they get paid as compensation for this compromise they take. For them money is often primary question.
    If you work in McDonalds - it makes sense only if you are paid.
    But you are musician - you do music anyway - paid or not.

    Ideally.. artsits should be supported throroughly byt universities, state, funds of rich people, business... whatever.
    As in the past they were maintained by kings, dukes, rich people and church.

    I think conception of professionalism that dominates today is one of the biggest frauds. Especially in arts IMHO.

    Student musicians should be preapared to be just musicians - not amateur or professionals.

    So if you choose arts - do not expect to be paid. This is not your reward. That simple and fair.

  43. #142

    User Info Menu

    That's what do the people who love what they do)))



    I call it dedication.

    PS
    By the way I am gioing to buy the method anyway - because I can afford it, find it helpful and I want to support Aldo.

  44. #143
    Artists being supported by the elite isn't exactly considered the golden era of art. If you read the biographies of many classical composers, it literally was the bane of their existence

    I can relate to the ideological and romantic nature of your arguments, but I suspect you never had to work to make a living? Money not being the primary focus of an artistic disposition (and most creative natures for that matter), state support for the arts, artists being able to be professionals, meaning getting paid and making a good living from it if they are successful enough (meaning doing what they do full time and not on an amateur level), and lastly, intellectual theft (or simply put, theft), are all completely different things.

  45. #144

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Alter View Post
    Artists being supported by the elite isn't exactly considered the golden era of art. If you read the biographies of many classical composers, it literally was the bane of their existence

    I can relate to the ideological and romantic nature of your arguments, but I suspect you never had to work to make a living? Money not being the primary focus of an artistic disposition (and most creative natures for that matter), state support for the arts, artists being able to be professionals, meaning getting paid and making a good living from it if they are successful enough (meaning doing what they do full time and not on an amateur level), and lastly, intellectual theft (or simply put, theft), are all completely different things.


    I read biographies... I never said that their life was easy.

    I never had to work to make a living? So make this kind of persomal presumptions in the forum... it is just stupid. Sorry.. it's not to insult you. But this kind of presumption is really stupid. (not you - the presumption only - in my opinion stupid presumption ca be made by the very clever men sometimes - even me - not in this case though)

    Basically you post says that I am a romatic idiot that never earned his living.

    No it's much tougher... I am convinced, very arrogant, agressive, extremly practical idealist.
    My convictions are the result of various exprences of my own, it's lived through and earned.
    And you know, I am really smart.

  46. #145

    User Info Menu


  47. #146
    If I offended you I apologise. Saying someone is idealistic and romantic doesn't belittle their opinions or experiences, certainly isn't calling them idiots.

    This ideology pretty much describes most of my friends (and me) growing up. But then reality catches up, and unless you find a way to actually get paid from music, the dream will fade away, and your life will drift to another everyday reality, away from music. As pedestrian as it may sound, even Herbie Hancock pays bills. You ll be surprised how many well known recording artists have a problem surviving these days.

  48. #147

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Alter View Post
    If I offended you I apologise. Saying someone is idealistic and romantic doesn't belittle their opinions or experiences, certainly isn't calling them idiots.

    This ideology pretty much describes most of my friends (and me) growing up. But then reality catches up, and unless you find a way to actually get paid from music, the dream will fade away, and your life will drift to another everyday reality, away from music. As pedestrian as it may sound, even Herbie Hancock pays bills. You ll be surprised how many well known recording artists have a problem surviving these days.
    I was not insulted, I was surprised)

    I know that side too... I have lots of friends who earn with music on different levels of income.

    I just found out early that the reality that 'catches up' as you said is just not mine.
    I know I should be stubborn...
    it's like being vegeterian because of moral conviction but once in conditions where there are not enough good vegitables and protein food to substitute meat...
    one becomes meat-eater again because the reality 'caughtes up'


    On important note: I know people need money to maintain their families and pay their bills... I just do not like when business bocemes normal situation in arts.

    It's unavoidable often, it's a headache, it's a problem... but it's not normal.
    I believe one just should not accept it as a standard. One should not say I do it becasue I am professional and it's ok. No it's not ok and you do it because it all works wrong. You can't avoid it but at least look at it with open face.

    PS
    I have family a few kids and just a regular work to maintain them, and the work that really interferes in my artistic activities.

  49. #148
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah View Post
    On important note: I know people need money to maintain their families and pay their bills... I just do not like when business bocemes normal situation in arts.
    Well it's settled then. Because *YOU* don't like it, i think it means it's perfectly OK for anyone to steal any art, period. Thanks for clarifying.

  50. #149

    User Info Menu

    Well it's settled then. Because *YOU* don't like it, i think it means it's perfectly OK for anyone to steal any art, period. Thanks for clarifying.
    Your logic is brisk and sparkling!

    Idealogically there are different conceptions of creative property.

    For example what is stealing a painting? To steal it physically? Watching its reproduced copy in the Internet for free? Watching it in museum without buying it (but having paid entry fee)?

    Is listening to music for in the internet stealing it? Whay are you so sure? Just becasue the lwayers told you?

    There are moral conception of property and legal ones, and they can be different from country to country, from culture to culture, from person to person...

    Just some of them

    1) you are the author you own it, and no-one can use it in no way without your permission. Then description of what is meant by 'using' may take a dozen of pages. So reading book without paying to you (without asking your permisson) is stealing it

    2) you are the author you own, and no-one can use it with monetary profit it without your permison. Then description of what is meant by 'using' may take a dozen of pages. So reading book even fo free anyway is ok but making a copy and sell it or making a movie over it is not

    3) you are the author and this is all you have (poor medievial sculptors and composers - often they did not have even that... and probably were quite happy - who knows?).

    Here stealing is when one tries to asign oneself the authorship.

    There are different types of people, economics, relationships, ideologies and conception in this world.

    What artist would ever prohibit to listen to his music just because someone cannot pay?

    In my opinion copyright should concern only authorship. And even this - speaking franky - good artist never cares if someon stole his idea because he has 10 more an dafter all it's not what he is there for.

  51. #150
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah View Post
    Your logic is brisk and sparkling!

    Idealogically there are different conceptions of creative property.

    For example what is stealing a painting? To steal it physically? Watching its reproduced copy in the Internet for free? Watching it in museum without buying it (but having paid entry fee)?

    Is listening to music for in the internet stealing it? Whay are you so sure? Just becasue the lwayers told you?
    I consider it stealing when my average income (over a 6 month period) from published work suddenly drops by 50% and I discover that it coincides with several sites publishing free versions of my work for download.

    It's easy to beat your chest and pontificate about such things if *YOU* are not losing money which clearly you are not.

    Just because it happens doesn't make it right. And just because a lawyer advises you doesn't make it wrong. Clearly you are struggling with issues of basic logic here. The conclusions you draw are coming from an imagined set of variables and criteria which don't make logical sense.

    A while back, motorola published an interview where they stated that they have a very narrow window once they release a new phone before the tech is copied and stolen by china who has very loose laws and enforcement around copy-written technology developed in the west. If they cannot recover their initial investment during that window, the product will lose money.

    Just because something happens and is known ahead of time, doesn't make it right. And your statement that it's not ok for doctors or factoryworkers to work for free but artists shouldn't be expected to derive income from their work just shows that you are not an artist , have never derived any income from art and probably don't know any artists.