I wrote this a long while back, but since everyone's talking about stealing music online this week because of this NPR piece from a young person who doesn't buy music, much like you probably, and this well-written response from David Lowery, I thought I'd repost it. Not because it's good, or because I even think you should bother reading it, but because I was too lazy to write anything new today. Everything that needed to be said is in that Lowery piece anyway. Good day.
"No, it's cool, cause if I download a movie online and I like it, I'll buy the DVD. Plus music and movies are too expensive, and most of them are crap anyway."
Oh word? Hey, here's an idea. Go into a restaurant, eat your meal, then if you like it, pay for it. Otherwise just peace out and kick the chef in the nuts on the way out the door. Same thing.
You know what I do when I can't afford something I kind of want? I don't get it. Woh. I know, pretty weird, right? Call me crazy, but I'm old school like that.
Whether it's a mortgage on a house, a brand new car, season three of Friday Night Lights or that thirteenth beer, if I don't have the money, I somehow pull my act together and move on empty handed. Why? Because I'm not an infantile On Demand omnivore incapable of satiating my demand for instant gratification. (Plus I need to save my money for gambling debts.)
No one cares about your half ass futuristic Robin Hood with a Mac book routine pal. We saw Fight Club too, yet somehow we managed to resist rolling that horseshit into a life of self-satisfied petty theft. You're not some freedom fighter standing up to the corporate overlords every time you search for Family Guy episodes on bit torrent, you're just an a-hole who's too cheap to shell out a few bucks for the things he wants, and too greedy to not steal shit you will never, ever possibly look at twice. Homer Simpson with his hand stuck in the internet candy machine over here.
You know who else has a story about why the dirt they did wasn't really illegal too? Every dude down at the courthouse.
Not that it's wrong just because it's illegal, mind you. It's wrong because you suck.
brought to you by
20 comments:
when the technology to duplicate the food in a restaurant on your dinner table for free comes along and you use it...
I can cook up a philosophy to justify any dirt I want to do too.
I don't download music or movies from the internet, but I do watch them online from some sites that offer streaming videos. I've noticed that a lot of them are new releases, and the majority of the new releases are obviously pirated films. The quality is usually poor, audio can be heavily influenced by noisy neighbors munching on popcorn; and inevitably, some huge guy will pick a crucial moment in the film to get up and go to the snack bar.
So, I guess my question is, can I enjoy watching the movie online, given that I'm not downloading it, or even getting the whole experience, or must I consider myself a douchbag?
You can cook up a philosophy to justify any dirt you want to do too.
It doesn't make your flawed analogies any more correct.
Taking=/sharing. You aren't depriving anyone of anything you're just copying something.
taking/sharing is depriving the artist of their just reward.
copyright exists to protect an artists living.
granted, the artists are probably not going to starve due to the large scale of sales they now have, but it doesnt mean its right for you take something that doesn't belong to you.
it may be a copy, but thats why we have 'copyright', if an artist wants people to make copies, it is his right to agree how the copies are distributed, if that means he want £9.99 for a copy of his work, that is his right.
'copyright' definition
the copyright law provides that the owner of a property has the exclusive right to print, distribute, and copy the work, and permission must be obtained by anyone else to reuse the work in these ways. Copyright is provided automatically to the author of any original work covered by the law as soon as the work is created.
The ability of thieves to rationalize their thieving is ancient and evergreen. It's just that now we have an entire generation of kids, not just an amoral minority, who have talked themselves into believing that their special kind of theft is okay.
"Look, it's just digital, so the creativity and/or craft that went into its production magically becomes a free service for my benefit." Revolting.
I think something that gets glossed over in this whole debate frequently is the fact that there are too many bands. There just isn't enough demand to meet the ever-expanding supply. Not all bands deserve to make a living at music just because they want to. That said, the people who do a good job of creating demand for their work should in fact be able to make money off it.
Cool story. Unrelated, a friend was over at my place and read my copy of Drinking and Diving whilst making with the doo-doo. How much do I owe you?
Did his magic poop somehow automatically beam the book into tens of thousands of homes instantaneously? Then you owe me like $20 bucks, on account of the deal I signed was really awful.
Confession: I have pirated one item I can remember in my life. It was the first episode of Sherlock's 2nd series. I didn't feel good about it.
I think it probably is wrong just because it's illegal. Or rather that that's enough to make it morally wrong in and of itself.
But you've really rarely DL stuff on the sly/cheap?
Really? Surprised you would subscribe to that philosophy.
As far as tv/movies, tht was the one time ever. I used to use Napster back in the day, like 12 years ago I guess.
Being a "media" person kind of effects things since I get so much stuff dumped on my doorstep, literally and figuratively speaking.
I'm kind of surprised that nobody seemed to read the part in that NPR girl's thing where she said she paid for the music, she just doesn't buy CDs. She said some shit like only a small portion was illegally downloaded off Kazaa or some shit, but that was it. I thought the point of her article was more about how she doesn't lament the demise of the CD because all her music is on her computer.
Lowery addresses that in the comments of his piece. It's unclear what she meant, I don't think you're reading is accurate, but I could be wrong.
You know what I do when I can't afford something I kind of want? I don't get it.
Sooooo fucking true! I DLed my fair share of free shit in the past. Now I pay like a good person. Don't be a leech. Support your shit.
A half-assed futuristic Robin Hood with a Macbook could be a really cool graphic novel. Although I suppose nowadays it would be a *gag* webcomic.
The comments were a little tl;dr but I re-read the original article and I guess I was wrong, she didn't say she bought the music digitally, she just got it from her prom date and college radio station.
"Being a "media" person kind of effects things since I get so much stuff dumped on my doorstep, literally and figuratively speaking. "
Watch out. If you do this:
http://blogs.sfweekly.com/shookdown/2012/06/when_greil_marcus_goes_shoppin.php
and don't report it as income on your taxes, you are breaking some laws as well. Just not laws that musicians get pissed about.
What's the tax issue there?
Nice post. I was checking continuously this
blog and I'm impressed! Very helpful information specially the last part :) I care for such information much. I was seeking this certain info for a long time. Thank you and good luck.
My web blog ... http://www.deutsche-casinos.eu/book-of-ra-one-seine-on-line-abart-der-ersten-technology-oder-die-deluxe-edition
Post a Comment