Debating the issue of "copying" music...

[steveh_131]

Thanks for the reasoned and thought-provoking response.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Thanks for the reasoned and thought-provoking response.

I've given you plenty of those, so I must conclude you are incapable of basic comprehension or are trolling. I am disinterested in talking to myself.

 

[steveh_131]

The way you're apparently looking at Unjust Enrichment is pretty broad. If someone on the internet gives me a tip on how to fix my car, I have been enriched. If they paid their mechanic for this tip back in 1982, do I need to track down their mechanic and pay him to avoid this unconscionable theft?

He expended his time and knowledge to impart this tip to his customer. He expected to be paid for his time and knowledge. I'm using it without paying. It meets all the criteria, right?

 

[steveh_131]

I've given you plenty of those, so I must conclude you are incapable of basic comprehension or are trolling. I am disinterested in talking to myself.

Then go pimp your resume elsewhere. Nobody asked you to take part in this debate. So you come here, offer your two cents, then get pissy when someone disagrees. Well, hey, if they don't immediately agree with your point of view then they must be a complete idiot, right? Why bother with a discussion forum at all with this attitude?

 

[Paco Bedejo]

No, it's no the anarchist argument. Your pirating was at the expense of the game manufacturer. You failed to compensation them for the use of their game. You have no valid defense. The game manufacturerr has remedies available to him. Unjust enrichment.

First, I've not pirated Game of Thrones. Second, it's not a game, it's a miniseries on HBO, based upon a series of books.

In a scenario where someone who would never spend $100+/mo for the requisite subscriptions to watch the programming, the copyright holders & licensees are not out any money by copied acquisition of the materials, as no monetary transaction would have happened absent a "free" alternative.

Your scenerio about coming into Fort Wayne is bizarre. Of the five elements of unjust enrichment only two possibly could be argued - That I was enriched and it was at your expense. It is not unjust, I have a defense (freedom of travel, freedom of association) and there is no remedy available to you. Test fails.

You're talking about laws. I'm talking about morals. I understand that you equate the two...others do not.

I obtain my media in the following fashions:

• Music: Free online services such as Slacker.com & Spotify
• eBooks: Kindle, Nook, & Google Books
• Audio Books: Audible.com Subscription
• Television/Movies: Hulu Plus & Netflix subscriptions
• Videogames: Online purchases & MMO Subscriptions

It's not uncommon for a person to have a similar list & then pirate the media they cannot acquire through similarly convenient channels. For example, a lot of people pirate videogames in order to verify they'll work on their PCs & ascertain the quality prior to purchasing them. The industry used to provide free demos for such purposes, but most publishers don't bother anymore.

Personally, if I value a piece of digital media, I ultimately pay for it in order to vote for creation of similar products.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

The way you're apparently looking at Unjust Enrichment is pretty broad. If someone on the internet gives me a tip on how to fix my car, I have been enriched. If they paid their mechanic for this tip back in 1982, do I need to track down their mechanic and pay him to avoid this unconscionable theft?

He expended his time and knowledge to impart this tip to his customer. He expected to be paid for his time and knowledge. I'm using it without paying. It meets all the criteria, right?

Nope. He gave you the tips, therefore the enrichment was not unjust.

Then go pimp your resume elsewhere. Nobody asked you to take part in this debate. So you come here, offer your two cents, then get pissy when someone disagrees. Well, hey, if they don't immediately agree with your point of view then they must be a complete idiot, right? Why bother with a discussion forum at all with this attitude?

Who got pissy? I just said that you are either unwilling or incapable of grasping the discussion.

I'm not name calling, but I have to say I agree with your self assessment.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

First, I've not pirated Game of Thrones. Second, it's not a game, it's a miniseries on HBO, based upon a series of books.

In a scenario where someone who would never spend $100+/mo for the requisite subscriptions to watch the programming, the copyright holders & licensees are not out any money by copied acquisition of the materials, as no monetary transaction would have happened absent a "free" alternative.



You're talking about laws. I'm talking about morals. I understand that you equate the two...others do not.


I obtain my media in the following fashions:

• Music: Free online services such as Slacker.com & Spotify
• eBooks: Kindle, Nook, & Google Books
• Audio Books: Audible.com Subscription
• Television/Movies: Hulu Plus & Netflix subscriptions
• Videogames: Online purchases & MMO Subscriptions

It's not uncommon for a person to have a similar list & then pirate the media they cannot acquire through similarly convenient channels. For example, a lot of people pirate videogames in order to verify they'll work on their PCs & ascertain the quality prior to purchasing them. The industry used to provide free demos for such purposes, but most publishers don't bother anymore.

Personally, if I value a piece of digital media, I ultimately pay for it in order to vote for creation of similar products.

I'm speaking strictly about the law. I don't equate morals and laws. You've never seen me give any opinion on what I think of stealing intellectual property.

 

[steveh_131]

Nope. He gave you the tips, therefore the enrichment was not unjust.

The mechanic, or the "owner" of said tips by your definition, did not give them to me.

His tips were pirated.

 

[Paco Bedejo]

I'm speaking strictly about the law. I don't equate morals and laws. You've never seen me give any opinion on what I think of stealing intellectual property.

Yet you're directing your argument to those in the thread who are discussing the moral merits. Perhaps you need to realign your sights.

 

[steveh_131]

I'm speaking strictly about the law. I don't equate morals and laws. You've never seen me give any opinion on what I think of stealing intellectual property.

Well never mind then. I don't much care to hear an analysis of the law and that's not the point I was arguing. It may very well fall under that legal definition, although it seems a little broad to me.

 

[steveh_131]

And FYI, you bust out the "troll" accusation every time you get pissy. It's a tell-tale sign

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

The mechanic, or the "owner" of said tips by your definition, did not give them to me.

His tips were pirated.

If the mechanic had some type of intellectual property rights to the tip, then yes you are violating them. There are a whole lot of other questions that need to be answered before you determine whether or not the enrichment was unjust or not. Then there's the question of defense, and remedies.

And FYI, you bust out the "troll" accusation every time you get pissy. It's a tell-tale sign

No, I bust out the troll accusation every time you or someone else is trolling.

 

[steveh_131]

No, I bust out the troll accusation every time you or someone else is trolling.

There are three possibilities when someone disagrees with you.

1. They are trolling.
2. They are stupid.
3. You are wrong.
4. You are both wrong.

Believe it or not, numbers 3 and 4 are a possibility. Even for someone as brilliant and perfect and educated as you.

 

[Benny]

If you're making money off of it without their consent then I disagree with doing that. Also, you're costing them money because all of those people you're charging to come and see it aren't going to rent it themselves.

What about $50.00 UFC pay per views? Do you think White and the Fertitas expect everyone to buy it individually? What is the difference besides price?

If you burned copies of that movie and sold them, would that be wrong?

Equally as wrong as the OP...Whatever degree that may be.

 

[Expat]

What about $50.00 UFC pay per views? Do you think White and the Fertitas expect everyone to buy it individually? What is the difference besides price?



Equally as wrong as the OP...Whatever degree that may be.

The NFL has been cracking down on Super Bowl parties. They have been threatening churches for having them. That is a free broadcast event but they say having it seen on big screens in churches violates their copyright. To me that shows the how insane some of this has become.

 

[Prometheus]

The NFL has been cracking down on Super Bowl parties. They have been threatening churches for having them. That is a free broadcast event but they say having it seen on big screens in churches violates their copyright. To me that shows the how insane some of this has become.

Yep.

 

[jsharmon7]

What about $50.00 UFC pay per views? Do you think White and the Fertitas expect everyone to buy it individually? What is the difference besides price?

You're asking the difference between how it should be and their realistic expectations. I'm sure they expect people will have some friends over to watch the fights. I doubt they would be happy to find out you're selling tickets to people to come watch it at your house. Or, what if instead of Benny doing it, Lucas Oil Stadium opened up and let people come in and watch it so they'd buy beer and food and such from them? Would they allow that to happen without legal ramifications? I know BW3 has fight night stuff, but I'm assuming they have a deal worked out with the UFC. I'm not positive though.

 

[Benny]

You're asking the difference between how it should be and their realistic expectations. I'm sure they expect people will have some friends over to watch the fights. I doubt they would be happy to find out you're selling tickets to people to come watch it at your house. Or, what if instead of Benny doing it, Lucas Oil Stadium opened up and let people come in and watch it so they'd buy beer and food and such from them? Would they allow that to happen without legal ramifications? I know BW3 has fight night stuff, but I'm assuming they have a deal worked out with the UFC. I'm not positive though.

Since a venue pays a variable amount of money based on seating capacity, the UFC would LOVE for Lucas Oil to host PPVs.

As for my original question, Dana White welcomes people to buy it and have people over(I can find his quote of you would like)...

So, what is the difference between me inviting 10 people over and charging $5.00 a piece and inviting 10 people over and charging $20 a piece(besides me being a bad friend for ripping my friends off)? The UFC isn't losing any business either way.

 

[snowrs]

I want to bring up another counter point.One of the most succesful bands of the last 50 years, encourages people to record and trade their shows in any way they can. It use to be via tapes in mailing and has since moved on to the internet. Care to guess the name of the band?

I do not see how they have lost any money from letting people trade their music, heck 15 years after their lead singer and the heart of their band passed away people are still buying thier material.

Learn to adapt and embrace and you will flourish.

 

[jsharmon7]

Since a venue pays a variable amount of money based on seating capacity, the UFC would LOVE for Lucas Oil to host PPVs.

As for my original question, Dana White welcomes people to buy it and have people over(I can find his quote of you would like)...

So, what is the difference between me inviting 10 people over and charging $5.00 a piece and inviting 10 people over and charging $20 a piece(besides me being a bad friend for ripping my friends off)? The UFC isn't losing any business either way.

I agree with the bolded, I said as much in my last post. As far as the first sentence in your post, I wasn't referring to Lucas Oil hosting a live event. What if they invited everyone in to watch a pay-per-view fight on their big screens? They didn't get written permission from the UFC, and didn't pay them a dime. They just opened up the doors and said "Hey we're showing the fight tonight, come on in and buy some beer and food and watch it." Do you think it would be right for Lucas Oil to do that, and do you think the UFC would take issue with it?