No you're not.

I am a little bit.

But all this arguing doesn't answer the question that I'd most like to see you address, which is, "How does any of this justify piracy?"

But again, I think the kernel here that we can all zero in on, is the Greg champions the free exchange of information whereas I think the rest of us do not categorize movies, music, etc as information.  This is what I was trying to get at.  Lincoln is a great movie based in truth, but it is not information.  It's media, it's art, it's cinema, it's entertainment, yes.  But Information?  That's a bit reductive, no?

Technically Greg, you're only so many chemicals and electrical impulses. Chemicals and electricity also want to be free.

With all this said, I would love to read a movie review by TheGreg.

"This batch of information that took roughly 2 hours and 13 minutes in earth time to download from the screen images onto my brain drive.  While no crashes occurred, I did not find my emotional receptors adequately pleased.  In fact, at roughly 01;03;22 of the informations download process I reali01100010100101010111010010101010"

TheGreg during a date.

"Greetings Mobile Flesh Data Receptor.  I understand we must consume large amounts of data during the "dinner" we had planned.  I hope you will inform me of all the data you acquired during your "day," and that I will acquire the necessary data to earn a goodnight sample study of the data on your cheek flesh."

TheGreg at a family reunion

"Which members of same flesh are expired and non operational?  This is the only Data I require."

The Greg's Lawyer, while TheGreg is on trial.

"Well, that's the question you have to answer. Your Honour, the courtroom is a crucible. In it we burn away irrelevancies until we are left with a pure product, the truth for all time. Now, sooner or later, this man or others like him will succeed in replicating TheGreg. And the decision you reach here today will determine how we will regard this creation of our genius. It will reveal the kind of a people we are, what he is destined to be. It will reach far beyond this courtroom and this one Greg. It could significantly redefine the boundaries of personal liberty and freedom, expanding them for some, savagely curtailing them for others. Are you prepared to condemn him and all who come after him to servitude and slavery? Your Honour, Starfleet was founded to seek out new life. Well, there it sits. Waiting. You wanted a chance to make law. Well, here it is. Make a good one."

Last edited by Eddie (2012-11-30 02:05:43)

This is pointless, reductive, deliberately misleading semantics used in order to justify an unethical practice. "Well, it's just 'data,' so why should I have to pay?" Well, Hamlet is just an assemblage of small shapes on a page, but I don't get to walk out of the bookstore without paying.

TheGreg is right about one particular point.    It has been declared (by the Supreme Court, I believe) that copyright infringement is not the equivalent of theft,  because the owner of the thing in question still retains possesion of that thing in its original unaltered form.

So no, it's not theft.   Neither is it jaywalking, murder, or animal cruelty... but like all of the above, it is a crime. 

It's a crime because it infringes on the right of an owner to distribute a creative work however they choose to do so.   Generally this is in order to limit access and create demand in order to sell for profit...  but the law is just as adamant that a copyright owner is legally entitled to do absolutely nothing with that thing as well.   It's not about what the owner does with their copies, it's that only the owner has the right to do anything.

And is this bad somehow?    Or do you believe you have a legal right to do what you want with a thing that I made?

The main problem here is that the movie/music industry doesn't want to evolve and adapt to the world that's rapidly changing around them. 20 years ago you could be a 'studio band', record 12 songs every year and rake in the cash while sitting on your ass for the rest of the year. Now you can't. You can grab a whole discography in less than a minute off the web. But what's the one thing you can't download? Experiences. No HD/BluRay rip can give you the experience of being at the live gig. Because of that touring and live shows became the main source of income for musicians (and I'm talking about proper musicians not Bieber or whichever abomination is 'in' these days).

The movie industry has to recognize that people can and will download movies. Not because they're free (although that is a factor obviously), but because it's convinient. Instead of trying to fight it they should find a way to embrace the change and find a way to use it to generate income. Why not offer direct movie downloads? You can pay the $7 and watch Twilight in the theater, or you can wait a week or two and grab a 720p version for $3 off the Paramounts server. No behind the scenes, no special features. Decent quality, low price, 100% income for the studio at no expense. Throw in a system where you can pay in advance for a bunch of movies and noone would even bother to look for torrents.

And there's your new nickname.

I'll allow it.