• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Administration Announces Massive Piracy Crackdown

somepeoplesay

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
198
Reaction score
74
Location
Austin, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
****. Thanks a lot Obummer.

While they may never be able to truly defeat piracy and drive it from the lurking depths of the internet, copyright protection attack-dog organizations like the RIAA and MPAA have long dreamed of the day when they would no longer have to pay for their own copyright enforcement. Now that dream is on the verge of coming true, thanks to the Obama administration.

After countless lobbyist dollars from the music and film industry and a brief "public review", the administration rolled out its vision to fight piracy yesterday afternoon. U.S. Vice President Joe Biden -- whose blunt speech has sometime left him in trouble -- did not mince words.

He states, "This is theft, clear and simple. It's smash and grab, no different than a guy walking down Fifth Avenue and smashing the window at Tiffany's and reaching in and grabbing what's in the window."

The sound-byte comparing downloads to stealing jewels from New York City's finest jeweler quickly lit up the web. Bob Pisano, interim chief executive officer at the Motion Picture Association of America praised the VP, "It is especially critical that the United States has an effective framework for protecting creative content online and enforcing intellectual property rights in the digital environment."

According to the Obama administration, the RIAA, and MPAA, the world economy is pretty much doomed if we don't start prosecuting pirates at home and abroad. Without such a crackdown, businesses will go bankrupt the coalition argues. Biden states, "Piracy hurts, it hurts our economy."
Full article.
 

CrazyMcCool

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2010
Messages
233
Reaction score
78
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
My bad, I just saw this was already posted in another forum section, could a mod please delete this.

Thank you :)
 
Last edited:

CrazyMcCool

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2010
Messages
233
Reaction score
78
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
People, I have already sent a letter to my Representative in Congress voicing my outrage by this fascist and anti democratic law, which helps the Cooperation s take more from the citizen, and artists.

This law is being pushed because of corporate lobbyists for the MPAA/RIAA saying that they are losing money due to "Piracy". In fact there is almost no evidence to support their claim and page after page of evidence to the contrary. Evidence even found by the Government Accountability Office just earlier this year in a study they conducted goes against this plan.

This is just a way to strip Americans of their freedoms and rights by another lobbyist who isn't for the people, by the people. But for themselves and of their selfish means.

People you do know that infected mashrooms a group that makes music and is very populer and successful uploads their music to p2p share sites? and they support it? All the money they make is from concerts.

Musicans make more money from concerts than from selling CD's.
Artists who are populer now are like that thanks to file sharing.
Artists who put their music for free online make a lot of money from live shows.
Obama talks a lot about helping the poor, when in reality he just wants to help the rich..

The combined planetary resources of our species can't stop an oil leak, yet the priority for our leaders is to liken me to a burglar for listening to music...

Fair enough. I'd be buying all my media, but if I get home with my copy of "Latest Action Flick", and I have even the slightest thought that it's not worth the $19.99 I paid for it, back to the store it goes, and I don't want any hassles about getting my immediate refund.

When the government back up the consumers, we'll start playing by the rules. As is, returning media is extremely difficult.
You can see this is really annoying..
I think when I can get arrested for thinking ( which is part of the this law)..I am going to be annoyed as fudge..
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
People, I have already sent a letter to my Representative in Congress voicing my outrage by this fascist and anti democratic law, which helps the Cooperation s take more from the citizen, and artists.

This law is being pushed because of corporate lobbyists for the MPAA/RIAA saying that they are losing money due to "Piracy". In fact there is almost no evidence to support their claim and page after page of evidence to the contrary. Evidence even found by the Government Accountability Office just earlier this year in a study they conducted goes against this plan.

This is just a way to strip Americans of their freedoms and rights by another lobbyist who isn't for the people, by the people. But for themselves and of their selfish means.

People you do know that infected mashrooms a group that makes music and is very populer and successful uploads their music to p2p share sites? and they support it? All the money they make is from concerts.

Musicans make more money from concerts than from selling CD's.
Artists who are populer now are like that thanks to file sharing.
Artists who put their music for free online make a lot of money from live shows.
Obama talks a lot about helping the poor, when in reality he just wants to help the rich..

The combined planetary resources of our species can't stop an oil leak, yet the priority for our leaders is to liken me to a burglar for listening to music...


You can see this is really annoying..
I think when I can get arrested for thinking ( which is part of the this law)..I am going to be annoyed as fudge..
The MPAA and RIAA have both parties in their back pocket.
They love to preserve their monopoly of the industry.

I have no problem taking what I want, buying it at it's current price levels is a rip off.
 

CrazyMcCool

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2010
Messages
233
Reaction score
78
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Exactly, its also an issue cause if this passes, artists who put their music online legally for download LEGALLY will also get persecuted for giving out their own music for free. Which is BULL****



US users be sure and write you Rep.

https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
 
Last edited:

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Artist to music hacker, "I took your car the other day and you called the police to report it stolen. I couldn't believe it. What a hypocrite you are!"
 

Travelsonic

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2006
Messages
1,389
Reaction score
327
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Artist to music hacker, "I took your car the other day and you called the police to report it stolen. I couldn't believe it. What a hypocrite you are!"
I'm a little lost here with the statement/quote, maybe because I've only been up 4 hours [and spent the better part of last night awake until the first peaks of sunlight]
 

jujuman13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
4,075
Reaction score
579
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I'm a little lost here with the statement/quote, maybe because I've only been up 4 hours [and spent the better part of last night awake until the first peaks of sunlight]
It is Chappy being typically Chappy.

Chappy understands and that is all that is important to Chappy.
 

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Here I'll spell it out for you.

If you owned something and someone just took it from you, you would be angry about it; you might even call the police about it.

But, not when it comes to music or video; when it comes to that then all of a sudden the rules are somehow different, at least for some people. Those people think it's their "right" to just take other's people's property and get all bitchy about it when the owner tries to protect it. Those people are thieves.

Of course, they have all kinds of justifications: they're just "sharing," the labels and studios are assholes, the original artists don't make much off of recorded media, etc., etc. It's self-serving bull**** which make these people hypocrites on top of everything else.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Here I'll spell it out for you.

If you owned something and someone just took it from you, you would be angry about it; you might even call the police about it.

But, not when it comes to music or video; when it comes to that then all of a sudden the rules are somehow different, at least for some people. Those people think it's their "right" to just take other's people's property and get all bitchy about it when the owner tries to protect it. Those people are thieves.

Of course, they have all kinds of justifications: they're just "sharing," the labels and studios are assholes, the original artists don't make much off of recorded media, etc., etc. It's self-serving bull**** which make these people hypocrites on top of everything else.
Can I copy my car infinitely?

Invalid comparison, you bought the illogical, ignorance based propaganda.
It's funny to see you support big corporations though.
 

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Edited:

Of course, they have all kinds of justifications: they're just "sharing," the labels and studios are assholes, the original artists don't make much off of recorded media, it's so easy to copy, etc., etc. It's self-serving bull**** which make these people hypocrites on top of everything else.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Edited:

Of course, they have all kinds of justifications: they're just "sharing," the labels and studios are assholes, the original artists don't make much off of recorded media, it's so easy to copy, etc., etc. It's self-serving bull**** which make these people hypocrites on top of everything else.
No, you're just ignorant of the topic and it shows but that is common with you.

You can't compare copying a song with stealing a car.
They are not even remotely the same thing, it isn't considered stealing by law.
 

Travelsonic

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2006
Messages
1,389
Reaction score
327
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Here I'll spell it out for you.

If you owned something and someone just took it from you, you would be angry about it; you might even call the police about it.
Indeed, because you took it, I no longer have it.

Face it, the analogy you're going for sucks, it has been discredited countless times.


Those people are thieves.
Libel only makes you look like a pompus, ignorant nutjob you know.

If no theivery occurred, then a thief he is not.

Uness you are calling Judge Noonan from the Grokster trial a liar:
Let me say what your problem is. You can use these harsh terms, but you are dealing with something new. And the question is, Does the statutory monopoly that Congress has given you reach out to that somthing new? And that's a very debatable question. You don't solve it by calling it theft. You have to show why this court should extend a statutory monopoly to cover the new thing. That's your problem.
Groklaw - Oral Arguments in Grokster & Ch. 4, 5 of "Free Culture"


Of course, they have all kinds of justifications: they're just "sharing," the labels and studios are assholes, the original artists don't make much off of recorded media, etc., etc. It's self-serving bull**** which make these people hypocrites on top of everything else.
And you aren't a hypocrite, claiming intellectual superiority and simultaneously painting all the opponents to the RIAA with this ignorant stereotype?
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Artist to music hacker, "I took your car the other day and you called the police to report it stolen. I couldn't believe it. What a hypocrite you are!"
I'm not a huge opponent of IP law, but this type of statement just doesn't make any sense. There's a pretty obvious distinction between the duplication of IP and the physical deprivation of a tangible object.
 

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
It's called copyright infringement and it is against the law. The Grokster case had to do with whether they could be held liable for copyright infringement crimes committed using their service. Ultimately they were shutdown.
 

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
I'm not a huge opponent of IP law, but this type of statement just doesn't make any sense. There's a pretty obvious distinction between the duplication of IP and the physical deprivation of a tangible object.
Point taken.
 

Travelsonic

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2006
Messages
1,389
Reaction score
327
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
It's called copyright infringement and it is against the law. .
Uh, no **** sherlock - well, actually, copyright infringement is a civil tort, and only becomes criminal after a certain level of piracy - especially for profit - has occurred, I was addressing you labeling it as analogous with theft, and your disingenuous calling of alleged infringers [and just those who opposed the RIAA] theives.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
It's called copyright infringement and it is against the law. The Grokster case had to do with whether they could be held liable for copyright infringement crimes committed using their service. Ultimately they were shutdown.
Gay marriage isn't legal, are you ok with that?

Legal ≠ right
 
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
316
Reaction score
117
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Congratulations for not getting your quotation of an article trimmed down to two sentences and having avoided your thread of having big red scary letters written all over it, making it an invitation of discussion that my thread lacked. (The following was not meant to be an attack on the administration of debatepolitics.com, it is meant to help illustrate the silliness that occurs thanks to state approved intellectual property aggression)

Intellectual property laws are state licensed monopolization of an intangible product that dictates what you can and cannot do with property you supposedly you own. Intellectual property laws also establish agreements by two parties that effect multiple 3rd parties if the second person broke the contract by unauthorized sharing of the information. It is for these reasons why I do not support intellectual property laws that go beyond a method of protection against fraud.

Many times I have heard arguments against information "piracy" about how it costs information companies a great deal of profit and also contributes to job loss.

I remember when debatepolitics collected ad revenue rather than being coerced into begging for donations. That's my assumption anyways.. If my assumption is true, how much profit and jobs did intellectual property aggression cost debatepolitics.com and it's previous advertisers? Is it also possible that because of the measures debatepolitics.com is coerced into taking to prevent infringement on intellectual property aggression, that many news and opinion businesses have lost exposure, lost relevancy and lost revenue that used to be generated by debatepolitics.com users? I'd say yes since I'm sure users have found posting new threads has become too inconvenient for them.
 

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Uh, no **** sherlock - well, actually, copyright infringement is a civil tort, and only becomes criminal after a certain level of piracy - especially for profit - has occurred, I was addressing you labeling it as analogous with theft, and your disingenuous calling of alleged infringers [and just those who opposed the RIAA] theives.
Confusing Words and Phrases That Are Worth Avoiding - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (FSF)

No Sherlock here, but, I take the point that it is an act of "unauthorized copying" not thievery or piracy. It is wrong.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Confusing Words and Phrases That Are Worth Avoiding - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (FSF)

No Sherlock here, but, I take the point that it is an act of "unauthorized copying" not thievery or piracy. It is wrong.
Why is it wrong?

The person only has to work once and then gets to profit from it indefinitely?
How can people like you call for profit medical care morally wrong but then do an about face and say that a person, who records an album once, is allowed to profit from it forever?

Why should people be allowed to restrict cultural and intellectual information, when it costs them virtually nothing to make additional copies of it?
 

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Why is it wrong? …
I am not a lawyer but my understanding is that it is wrong because you obtain usage rights which do not include the right to duplicate. Making copies violates the terms of your agreement with the owner of the copyright.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I am not a lawyer but my understanding is that it is wrong because you obtain usage rights which do not include the right to duplicate. Making copies violates the terms of your agreement with the owner of the copyright.
Unfortunately for the maker, they sold all their rights to ownership when the exchange took place.
They have no reasonable expectation of control over the "thing" because it is intangible, that they sold.

I sign no contracts when I purchase an item like a DVD or CD.
 
Top Bottom