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
| No. There are a lot of things/ideas that have been created by one person and then copyrighted by another. Also, there's no way something things/ideas are worth the amount they are earning from people paying for them. |
| The term "intellectual property" can mean a huge variety of things. *chuckle* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_implants This counts too.^ |
 |
georgi said: I know, old thread, but the other one seemed to spark some interest and seeing there isn't much to talk about in General Discussion right now, figured: Why Not? Ok I will let you off the hook wit dis one (but beware) XD I don't care about copyright so much, i download because i simply can. |
| Sure it may infringe on their rights to hold intellectual property, but I don't really care too much. |
 |
| Well, users are not in a position to say whether they were violating laws of intellectual property or not, the law states that whoever performs an action that matches the discription of an action that is criminilized in penal laws, a crime is occured regardless of the circumstances and excuses that person has. Laws of intellectual property are clear. E.g.: "Sharing a copyrighted material by distributing, copying, showing it in public and taking credits for it without prior permission from the author is illegal" |
Rebella said: Well, users are not in a position to say whether they were violating laws of intellectual property or not, the law states that whoever performs an action that matches the discription of an action that is criminilized in penal laws, a crime is occured regardless of the circumstances and excuses that person has. Laws of intellectual property are clear. E.g.: "Sharing a copyrighted material by distributing, copying, showing it in public and taking credits for it without prior permission from the author is illegal" The purpose of this discussion is not to say whether there is violation of intellectual property from a legal standpoint. It's pretty clear that there is. The purpose is to examine whether there really is a violation from a moral standpoint. Edit: What I mean by this, consider this rather extreme example. Let's say the United States suddenly becomes like Hitler's Germany, and there are laws established that it's okay to steal from and rape people of race different than the american. Then, somebody makes a discussion on whether or not this is right, and he is told that the law is pretty clear on that, so yes, of course it's right. Do you get my meaning? Just because there is a law does not necessarily mean the law is right. It might be, but it also might not. Edit2: Sorry, gotta go for now, we can continue in 3 hours. |
georgiMar 9, 2009 4:56 AM
| A past can last a lifetime. How to Read Manga! | AnimeBytes | iMangaScans |
georgi said: Rebella said: Well, users are not in a position to say whether they were violating laws of intellectual property or not, the law states that whoever performs an action that matches the discription of an action that is criminilized in penal laws, a crime is occured regardless of the circumstances and excuses that person has. Laws of intellectual property are clear. E.g.: "Sharing a copyrighted material by distributing, copying, showing it in public and taking credits for it without prior permission from the author is illegal" The purpose of this discussion is not to say whether there is violation of intellectual property from a legal standpoint. It's pretty clear that there is. The purpose is to examine whether there really is a violation from a moral standpoint. Well, laws made it illegal because it's immoral. After all morals and ethics ARE a source of law in every country. Search for why violating intellectual property was criminilized in your country and you get the answer for that. Many laws were made because of the strong influence of religions, morals and customs in those countries. Edit: Excellent point. It's called double standards. The United States can't create its own standards and if it did, then it's by force. However, The US changed it's moto from "operation freedom" to "a matter of trying to keep their intere$t$" because no one agrees with "the war on Iraq to free it from Saddam Hussein" story anymore. |
RebellaMar 9, 2009 5:03 AM
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 |
271 |
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 |