Do you think downloading copyrighted material is an infringment of the creator's right to intellectual property?
Yes
35.0%
21
No
18.3%
11
Depends
21.7%
13
There is no such thing as intellectual property
25.0%
15
60 votes
| I know this topic has been discussed a lot, especially in the context of torrent sites. Now, I assume a lot of the members here have not purchased everything they have seen, neither have they watched everything on television exclusively. This would leave me to believe that at least some watch their anime either by downloading it via BitTorrent, IRC, or streaming it. My question to you is: Would this mean that by watching anime, we are actually violating the right of the creator to intellectual property of his work (the creator may encompass several people, I guess). I am tempted to say no. I'll give my reasons later, as the discussion develops. There you go, fire away. |
| A past can last a lifetime. How to Read Manga! | AnimeBytes | iMangaScans |
| Yes. If you spend effort and time on creating something, you have every right to declare that it's yours, so long as it does not infringe on the property claim of others. It is equivalent to taking a piece of art by saying it's not the artist's property. True, unlike "the real world" you don't remove the original piece but "create" a new version of it, but you still take credit or share something which the creator had not wanted to be shared unless given permission. We should respect the rights of the creators. Unless you want to be a selfish brat and say you don't care about the time and effort they spend ;) |
| The answer is yes, based on society's 'official' current standards. I'm not sure whether, due to blatant piracy, this mentality is different now. Though. And I've recently been thinking about the morality of intellectual property, being a person who's never been fond of the ownership of land. Edit Not voting in the poll, trig? I'll also go more into depth on my feelings about this subject once I give it more thought. A lot more thought. |
asandariOct 27, 2008 5:27 PM
| Sure, they own it. But I couldn't give any less of a damn about their intellectual property rights. |
| No. My answer may be ignorant, but this is how I've always seen it. I watch Spongebob on t.v. I liked the episode. I download it. If they wanted me to buy Spongebob, then they would not have aired it on t.v. The same thing with anime, with the exception of it doesn't air as the cable/satellite company does not PROVIDE it. Doesn't seem exactly fair that one part of the world gets to watch for the same price of a cable/satellite bill (give or take the providers) and the other parts of the world get other crap. One could argue that you wouldn't get Spongebob if you payed for a super super basic service, but then again some stations have free streams or put up recent episodes to watch for free (I guess you could say Comedy Central). It doesn't seem to be hurting them that you don't have to buy a $20 dvd. As stated before my argument maybe crude or ignorant, but hell, I'm too young to know how the world works. |
| Well, I was thinking of an analogy to taking a book from the library. Without a doubt, the author put effort into the creation of the book. However, by signing it out from the library and reading it, you are able to enjoy what he has created. You do not have to pay anything (unless you are late returning it). Has this infringed the creator's rights? If you download anime, I don't think you claim to own what you downloaded. You watch it, for free, and doing so does not infringe the creator's right; enjoying his creation was the initial intent anyways. I don't know if you get what I want to say... |
| A past can last a lifetime. How to Read Manga! | AnimeBytes | iMangaScans |
| If I spend 1000 hours developing something, I sacrifice that time which could've been spent elsewhere. I sacrifice the money I could've made doing something else. I expect that 1000 hours to payoff, and so I charge my product. I have rights over that something that I made out of nothing. @asandari I never vote in polls because I'm so badass. |
| I actually go for direct download most of the time. To answer the question: Yes. Why? Because "right to intellectual property" is merely legal, and by these merely legal definitions, I am a big-time criminal. Now, I don't agree, at all, with the law. I say that intellectual property is nonsense. It leads to truly absurd situations - Monsanto owning important crops' DNA sequences due to the most minimal of tinkering with them, by extension letting them own entire species of crops. Companies earning money on dead artists' behalf - they had nothing to do with it whatsoever and contribute nothing excepr bureaucracy. That's the surace level - intellectual rights lead to most undesirable situations. Deeper down, I just cannot justify owning a concept, a work of art, "intellectual labour". These things no longer take anything to produce - they're chisel and ones and zeroes, copying them and distributing them does not harm anyone - indeed, it is an expression of freedom and benefits those suffling it around. And I really like freedom. What is your intellectual products? It's merely a pattern. I see no possible justifications for it. I also have aesthetic dislikings with the whole thing but I'll let that slide. Now, it is necessary. Our society is built so that we have to support the artists by buying their stuff, or they'll starve, have to stop creating and get a job, whatever. So by extension, intellectual property stifles creativity by demanding popularity, or one cannot substantiate a life on what one does. Changing into a system where the necessities and luxuries of living were ensured to everyone without any labour needed - something I believe most possible - would make abolishing intellectual property possible. For now, I steal from the rich and trade with the poor. Compromises, compromises. |
How is the world ruled and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read. | Report rules abuse | Your Panel | Clubs | Messages | Forum | Recent <img src="http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4672/stuhlbarg.png" /> |
Raistlin said: The library buys those books though doesn't it. Some monetary value taken from somewhere paid for that material. And somewhere along the line, someone must have bought the original to copy and distribute via digital means when it comes to most intellectual material. |
How is the world ruled and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read. | Report rules abuse | Your Panel | Clubs | Messages | Forum | Recent <img src="http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4672/stuhlbarg.png" /> |
georgi said: You watch it, for free, and doing so does not infringe the creator's right; enjoying his creation was the initial intent anyways. I don't know if you get what I want to say... As sad as it is, I do not believe this to be true, some of the time, if not most of the time. My idea of society, a short while ago (two weeks) was simply to motivate creation through pride and base the motivation off of inspiration. This could increase the originality of 'professional' level works, while admittedly greatly reducing their production quality. However recently something made me question this, I forget what exactly, but I've started to question it nonetheless. Edit: Concerning the library argument, don't they have to obtain permissions to lend out the books anyways? |
asandariOct 27, 2008 5:48 PM
| I also want to make a clear distinction between moral and legal intellectual property rights. Legal rights are those that vary from country to country, depending on its laws. Moral rights would, ideally, apply to everyone. As somebody pointed out, once the material has been created, no matter how often it is distributed, it wouldn't make the creator lose any money; this is not the case if he was selling apples, since every apple taken means one apple less to sell. However, with digital data, even if a million copies are taken, the author would not lose anything. |
| A past can last a lifetime. How to Read Manga! | AnimeBytes | iMangaScans |
| If you create it and stealing majorly from someone else then it should belong to you. Property can follow a cycle of creating, showing, selling and recycling the money to create something new like a sequel to a show or something new entirely. If the chain is broke, then the most important part of the chain to keep it going, money, does not fuel the chain and thus if thoroughly missing can cause the creating something new part of the chain to not occur. I might seem hypercritical by stealing works but feel ignorance to the issue is unacceptable. One could say mx0 is an example. Though it had a strong following and 2.3k+ members on mal can show how low sales drove mx0 to an early end. Tv stations plaster ads and promote their dvds to fund their projects, if more and more people stop spending money on their products then more shows will come and go. |
 |
| Personally, I think if you care more about people paying for your music than actually listening to it, you're not much of a musician. Because you care more about money than music. And the idea of intellectual property is a flexible one. You don't have absolute right to everything you make, especially if you or someone makes it available to everyone on the internet, right? If you give nude pics to your boyfriend/girlfriend, and they post them all over the internet, without your consent, what can you do about it? And who's intellectual property is that? The idea of intellectual property is really flexible. It's not a tangible object like a vase or a piece of bread. And completely different moral ideas apply to it. |
 Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| Well, you say potential profit, but what potential is there of profit in countries where the anime/creation in question will never even be put to sale? |
| A past can last a lifetime. How to Read Manga! | AnimeBytes | iMangaScans |
georgi said: As somebody pointed out, once the material has been created, no matter how often it is distributed, it wouldn't make the creator lose any money; this is not the case if he was selling apples, since every apple taken means one apple less to sell. However, with digital data, even if a million copies are taken, the author would not lose anything. Time is quite precious. It can correlate to economic value. If I have a job that pays $15 an hour, and decide to work on a digital project instead. I spend, like in my previous example, 1000 hours on it. I sacrifice 1000 hours that I could've spent on my job instead, losing 15 grand. I would want to receive reimbursement. Kaiserpingvin said: I say that intellectual property is nonsense. It leads to truly absurd situations - Monsanto owning important crops' DNA sequences due to the most minimal of tinkering with them, by extension letting them own entire species of crops. Companies earning money on dead artists' behalf - they had nothing to do with it whatsoever and contribute nothing excepr bureaucracy. That's the surace level - intellectual rights lead to most undesirable situations. Indeed, such situations are quite absurd; there should be limits set on what is acceptable. Perhaps what I'm referring to is more of the creation and engineering rather than research and discovery. |
| Burzum probably doesn't want nonwhites listening to his music. So by being nonwhite and listening to his music, you're violating the wishes of him and listening to his music. Similarly, some artists do not want people listening to their music for free and without paying. But in neither case do I believe they should necessarily have their wishes granted. And the artists who actually put their music out there for free are the ones I actually want to buy. And again with the library thing, people are often paying so indirectly for things it still doesn't amount to giving more money to the creators than piracy. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
Plate said: About sums it up.Sure, they own it. But I couldn't give any less of a damn about their intellectual property rights. |
| Some things can't be ordered unfortunately.:( |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
tr1ggers4d said: Time is quite precious. It can correlate to economic value. If I have a job that pays $15 an hour, and decide to work on a digital project instead. I spend, like in my previous example, 1000 hours on it. I sacrifice 1000 hours that I could've spent on my job instead, losing 15 grand. I would want to receive reimbursement. Say, I spend 1000 hours making something, overcharge, and then expect people to pay - people will find other venues of acquiring your product. If you do not motivate your possible customers to purchase your stuff, and it's easy for them to get it otherwise, you do not deserve the money. The American anime market's business model is based on pity - aww, if we don't buy it they'll go out of business. You don't actually need to buy the DVDs to get the same quality, hell, fansubs are often better and sometimes stuff is edited from the American release. So if I make a piece of art, spend a year, charge 10k to buy it but let people look at it freely, should I be surprised if someone takes a picture of it? Should I be surprised if that person shows that picture to others? What one should be surprised of is that they do not charge for that picture. |
| If Varg didn't want people from all around to listen to his sshit then he shouldn't have gained the mass medias attention when he burned those places and killed that dude. |
|
Netforce said: If Varg didn't want people from all around to listen to his sshit then he shouldn't have gained the mass medias attention when he burned those places and killed that dude. Yeah...but take a look at his words. You can tell he believes only a select few in this world deserve to have rights to listening to his music. He didn't burn down churches for attention whoring either. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
Plate said: tr1ggers4d said: Time is quite precious. It can correlate to economic value. If I have a job that pays $15 an hour, and decide to work on a digital project instead. I spend, like in my previous example, 1000 hours on it. I sacrifice 1000 hours that I could've spent on my job instead, losing 15 grand. I would want to receive reimbursement. Say, I spend 1000 hours making something, overcharge, and then expect people to pay - people will find other venues of acquiring your product. If you do not motivate your possible customers to purchase your stuff, and it's easy for them to get it otherwise, you do not deserve the money. The American anime market's business model is based on pity - aww, if we don't buy it they'll go out of business. You don't actually need to buy the DVDs to get the same quality, hell, fansubs are often better and sometimes stuff is edited from the American release. So if I make a piece of art, spend a year, charge 10k to buy it but let people look at it freely, should I be surprised if someone takes a picture of it? Should I be surprised if that person shows that picture to others? What one should be surprised of is that they do not charge for that picture. Okay, you don't like the prices. Big deal. That's like justifying shoplifting or theft by high prices. I don't see the logic. It may be a reason why you do such actions, but it by no means justifies your actions. My point is not how absurd or extreme creators are going to go to protecting their work, but I simply feel they have the right to. When you create something, you put energy and time into it. Of course you are supposed to charge accordingly, but people can charge more or less as they wish. It is up to them. They made it, we didn't. If you don't like their product, find a cheaper alternative or make your own. Or just fucking pirate it. |
tr1ggers4d said: This is how I justify my theft...everyday of my life, and it works out GREATOkay, you don't like the prices. Big deal. That's like justifying shoplifting or theft by high prices. I don't see the logic. It may be a reason why you do such actions, but it by no means justifies your actions. |
tr1ggers4d said: Okay, you don't like the prices. Big deal. That's like justifying shoplifting or theft by high prices. I don't see the logic. It may be a reason why you do such actions, but it by no means justifies your actions.  |
| ^Nice pic, I agree. |
| Remember, the issue here is not necessarily whether the creator has property rights to his work, but whether you infringe that right by downloading. I am not challenging the fact that the authors own their creations. |
| A past can last a lifetime. How to Read Manga! | AnimeBytes | iMangaScans |
Plate said: tr1ggers4d said: Okay, you don't like the prices. Big deal. That's like justifying shoplifting or theft by high prices. I don't see the logic. It may be a reason why you do such actions, but it by no means justifies your actions. Entertaining image, I believe i posted it in irc quite some time ago. Anyway, that's ignoring the core of my argument. It doesn't justify your actions. You're still "indulging" yourself on property that is not yours, and which you do not have permission to access or use. It's not the sense that piracy copies and theft removes, it's the principal of the matter. They are both the same. You do not have proper permission to access or use something, but you do so anyway. |
| There is no such thing as intellectual property (your vote) I'd take it one step further and say there is no such thing as property. You can't own something, you can only use some method of force to hold it. But if we're saying you can own things, I'd say that once you sell media in any form, it is no longer yours. Selling means transferring ownership. If I can't share my new CD or movie with anyone I want, I don't actually own it, and that's bullshit. The problem is that intellectual property doesn't have any actual tangible usefulness and thus its value is subjective. You can copy it over and over again out of thin air, the only charge is the media it's copied onto. It's not that I don't have sympathy for someone who's struggling to make a living on a job involved with media, but I don't think that just creating something entertaining entitles you to make a living off it. |
| I think everyone agrees that us pirating peoples shit is infringing on their rights...but I also think 99% of the people here just dont care |
hikky said: There is no such thing as intellectual property (your vote) I'd take it one step further and say there is no such thing as property. You can't own something, you can only use some method of force to hold it. But if we're saying you can own things, I'd say that once you sell media in any form, it is no longer yours. Selling means transferring ownership. If I can't share my new CD or movie with anyone I want, I don't actually own it, and that's bullshit. The problem is that intellectual property doesn't have any actual tangible usefulness and thus its value is subjective. You can copy it over and over again out of thin air, the only charge is the media it's copied onto. It's not that I don't have sympathy for someone who's struggling to make a living on a job involved with media, but I don't think that just creating something entertaining entitles you to make a living off it. Forget my previous posts, the one with the Reinhard sig is right. |
hikky said: I'd take it one step further and say there is no such thing as property. You can't own something, you can only use some method of force to hold it. Truth in distilled form. Razma said: I think everyone agrees that us pirating peoples shit is infringing on their rights...but I also think 99% of the people here just dont care I don't agree. Read our posts before blanketing us all okay? |
How is the world ruled and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read. | Report rules abuse | Your Panel | Clubs | Messages | Forum | Recent <img src="http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4672/stuhlbarg.png" /> |
| Yes. But the thing is that, they REALLY overcharge for the seasons. And in North America, they release them in 3 episode packs. What the fuck is that!? lol. you end up spending more money buying the 3-packs than buying the full season!!! |
| Signature has been deleted because it exceeded the size limits. |
Kaiserpingvin said: No I like my blanket theory much better, plus it saves time this wayI don't agree. Read our posts before blanketing us all okay? edit- You even answered the question with a "Yes" so wtf is the dealio? |
Raistlin said: i proclaim ignorance in terms of what can/can't be ordered, lol How do I subscribe to this site? http://biscuitclub.fc.yahoo.co.jp/ And where do I buy IOSYS albums? |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
hikky said: There is no such thing as intellectual property (your vote) I'd take it one step further and say there is no such thing as property. You can't own something, you can only use some method of force to hold it. But if we're saying you can own things, I'd say that once you sell media in any form, it is no longer yours. Selling means transferring ownership. If I can't share my new CD or movie with anyone I want, I don't actually own it, and that's bullshit. The problem is that intellectual property doesn't have any actual tangible usefulness and thus its value is subjective. You can copy it over and over again out of thin air, the only charge is the media it's copied onto. It's not that I don't have sympathy for someone who's struggling to make a living on a job involved with media, but I don't think that just creating something entertaining entitles you to make a living off it. Instead of saying that there is no right of property (I for one like to think that there is a point in buying something; if I couldn't have property, I wouldn't be able to protest if I was to be robbed) you should perhaps consider that right to intellectual property is a secondary, hence less of an important right. Can you think of a right that would be more important than the right to intellectual property? |
| A past can last a lifetime. How to Read Manga! | AnimeBytes | iMangaScans |
ukonkivi said: If he did not want his music to be heard then why record it. Music once recorded will always be spread and heard from all. You start it by wanting to share it with the selected few you choose, if only they hear then you it's great for you, but his music was marketed. No doubt he knew that whites weren't the only one that heard it once he went to jail. He choose to keep making stuff till 1999, it's not about his white supremacy thoughts then. |
|
Razma said: Kaiserpingvin said: No I like my blanket theory much better, plus it saves time this wayI don't agree. Read our posts before blanketing us all okay? edit- You even answered the question with a "Yes" so wtf is the dealio? Read. Then comprehend. Because I view intellectual property as a legal construct, and that legal construct explicitly says that doing this is a transgression on my part vis-a-vis his rights. Then I go on to deny the law any basis I can agree with except crass necessity. |
How is the world ruled and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read. | Report rules abuse | Your Panel | Clubs | Messages | Forum | Recent <img src="http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4672/stuhlbarg.png" /> |
| Of course it is, and I might actually feel like respecting intellectual property if more anime was released in English speaking countries. Wait, no I wouldn't. =D |
Netforce said: ukonkivi said: If he did not want his music to be heard then why record it.He wanted his music to be heard by member of his own race. Especially Norwegian ones. Can you just imagine how he'd react if he was told his music was being listened to by members of the black race? And marketing? What marketing? This is black metal. They like their obscurity. |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
georgi said: Instead of saying that there is no right of property (I for one like to think that there is a point in buying something; if I couldn't have property, I wouldn't be able to protest if I was to be robbed) you should perhaps consider that right to intellectual property is a secondary, hence less of an important right. Can you think of a right that would be more important than the right to intellectual property? If there's no property robbing would be the most useless action in the universe. Even impossible, by definition. More important rights - free choice, life, integrity, ad infinutm. |
How is the world ruled and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read. | Report rules abuse | Your Panel | Clubs | Messages | Forum | Recent <img src="http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4672/stuhlbarg.png" /> |
Kaiserpingvin said: ok ok ok....bottom line though..what was your answer? I dont care about the filler explanationRazma said: Kaiserpingvin said: No I like my blanket theory much better, plus it saves time this wayI don't agree. Read our posts before blanketing us all okay? edit- You even answered the question with a "Yes" so wtf is the dealio? Read. Then comprehend. Because I view intellectual property as a legal construct, and that legal construct explicitly says that doing this is a transgression on my part vis-a-vis his rights. Then I go on to deny the law any basis I can agree with except crass necessity. |
More topics from this board
Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Luna - Aug 2, 2021 |
272 |
by traed
»»
Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM |
|
» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )Desolated - Jul 30, 2021 |
50 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM |
|
» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.Desolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
1 |
by Bourmegar
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM |
|
» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor lawDesolated - Aug 3, 2021 |
17 |
by kitsune0
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM |
|
» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To ItselfDesolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
10 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM |