Nicktendo Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 Pardon? Theres no need to start name calling espessialy from someone who dosent even have a birth certificate just a written appology from durex. You sir, are an absolute cunt. I'm going to stop posting on these forums because I can't be arsed dealing with backwards thinking, narrow minded haters like yourself.
Will Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 Pardon? Theres no need to start name calling espessialy from someone who dosent even have a birth certificate just a written appology from durex. This is amazing, I'll be keeping that one for future use. Idiot..... I'm 'poor' by many standards. Why the fuck should I 'go without' because I don't happen to have as much disposable income as Tom, Dick and Harry down the street.... ... But because I'm 'poor' I shouldn't be able to live like this. Fuck you. Bigot. It's entirely reasonable to not buy things you can't afford, absolutely no justification for stealing music at all. I really hate this sense of entitlement people seem to have nowadays, if you're so poor you can't afford a few songs then how on earth do you afford all of these gigs, t-shirts, posters etc? You can't pick and choose what you pay for in life.
Cube Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 I'm sorry, was my agreeance offensive...? Wasn't meant to be, I just agreed with every they had said. I have no quarrels with your agreement, just the use of "here, here" instead of "hear, hear".
EEVILMURRAY Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 You can't pick and choose what you pay for in life. ... I like to think I can.
Nicktendo Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 You can't pick and choose what you pay for in life. It's called freedom. It's a basic human right...
danny Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 These two posts just make you look like a complete prick. Saying poor people should go without. Yeah why not. And what's with all these homeless shelters? They don't need a house they can sleep on the street. And why do we send toys to poorer countries at Christmas? They don't need toys to live their life, if they can't afford to buy them then they should just go without. Its hardly the same. You need a house or at least shelter you would not last very long living without either. The poor kids dont need toys. But its nice that they should have them. If these people are that poor then maybe they should sell there PC and stop paying for broadband then thye could afford to buy CDs. I cant afford loads of stuff, that dosent mean that i should have them. Im poor and i just go without. I fail to see how i look a prick the first comment is being realistic you do not need music (yes the world would be a duller place etc etc), your heart will not stop if you do not have it. And the second comment was a responce to a totally needless insult that was totally uncalled for. Where did you get that one from, and how long have you been sitting on it? Using this on my workmate would work a right treat. Got it off one of the lecturers at work today. Had to use it at the first chance i got haha It's called freedom. It's a basic human right... But theft a copy right infringment are not basic human rights so dont complain when companys start taking you or other people to court. You can choose to steal or infringe on copyright laws that dosent mean that you can do so with out doing time/paying back large sums of money. You sir, are an absolute cunt. I'm going to stop posting on these forums because I can't be arsed dealing with backwards thinking, narrow minded haters like yourself. The only person who is a hater is you. I gave my opinion and you resorted to calling names.
Diageo Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 Is downloading a music video off youtube that the publishers put there themselves wrong? This isn't rhetorical I'm not sure on the answer?
Ramar Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 I don't think there's many people on the internet who haven't illegally downloaded a song. Though to be fair I'd much rather buy an album on CD than own it digitally (the inner collector/hoarder in me). I use iTunes for single downloads, and if its an old song or obscure, I may obtain it via means deemed as illegal. I've only torrented three albums, justified by the fact two weren't released here and the other band folded, so I deduced they'd no longer want my money. My personal view on the debate though is companies need to harness the internet better, if it weren't for the internet I'd never had listened to some bands. Bands that I've subsequently invested money in by gigs, t-shirts and cd purchases. But at the same time some people need to stop being shitcunts and downloading several albums a day. Some middle ground needs to be found, and personally I don't see that being court cases but a bit of brainstorming.
danny Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 Is downloading a music video off youtube that the publishers put there themselves wrong?This isn't rhetorical I'm not sure on the answer? It probably is wrong and probably against the terms of use of you tube. But it is not really as moraly wrong as downloading albums as the companys have put those videos online for people to access at any time for free anyway.
Slaggis Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 It probably is wrong and probably against the terms of use of you tube. But it is not really as moraly wrong as downloading albums as the companys have put those videos online for people to access at any time for free anyway. Not as morally wrong? Surely by your argument it's exactly the same? Downloading a music track, or illegally downloading the video from youtube. Either way you're downloading the track, so how is one lesser than the other? ...I'm not getting involved in this debate, just wondering how your logic supposedly works.
Cube Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 It's just as illegal as recording it off the radio and onto a cassette.
danny Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 Not as morally wrong? Surely by your argument it's exactly the same? Downloading a music track, or illegally downloading the video from youtube. Either way you're downloading the track, so how is one lesser than the other? ...I'm not getting involved in this debate, just wondering how your logic supposedly works. Well my logic was in the fac that they have placed it up on the internet for you to use as many times as you wish when you wish to view it. So having it on your laptop is still wrong. I just feel less wrong as its not really any different to loging in to youtube and watching it there any way.
Slaggis Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 Well my logic was in the fac that they have placed it up on the internet for you to use as many times as you wish when you wish to view it. So having it on your laptop is still wrong. I just feel less wrong as its not really any different to loging in to youtube and watching it there any way. No, but it's not the going round listening to a downloaded track thats illegal. It's the physical act of actually downloading it that is. So, they're exactly the same, and just as "Morally" wrong as you would put it.
Diageo Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 So if I were to have youtube on my ipod, and could go on it to listen to the music anytime I wanted, then that would be okay? i don't see how that's any different than downloading it...
Slaggis Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 So if I were to have youtube on my ipod, and could go on it to listen to the music anytime I wanted, then that would be okay? i don't see how that's any different than downloading it... Which you can do, and it's perfectly legal (but would be a total hassle) You haven't got a copy of that video that you can give to anyone else or share because it's on youtube's server.
Diageo Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 What if I don't share it or give it to anyone else?
Supergrunch Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 Which you can do, and it's perfectly legal (but would be a total hassle) You haven't got a copy of that video that you can give to anyone else or share because it's on youtube's server. You have, to play it it has to be downloaded to your RAM. Which is of course legal, it's downloading it to your ROM that's illegal.
Cube Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 You have, to play it it has to be downloaded to your RAM. Which is of course legal, it's downloading it to your ROM that's illegal. You would have a very hard time downloading it to your ROM. Although I presume you mean hard drive (or other memory storage device)
Diageo Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 I don't see what the difference is between watching it on youtube on your phone and listening to it on your phone after downloading it. If you're not gonna sell it off again or give it to other people etc.
Paj! Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 But downloading it means you can play it on mp3 players, burn it to disc etc. You can do that if you pay for it, or by Dl'ing it illegally. So by not paying for it, you are not giving them the money they could have for doing those acts. Youtube streams (effectively) videos. They aren't in your possession to share.
ReZourceman Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 Downloading porns legal though, right? If it ain't I've just become genocide-level-law-breaker.
Fierce_LiNk Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 Downloading porns legal though, right? If it ain't I've just become genocide-level-law-breaker. It's only illegal if the porn is bad. If the porn is good, then it's ok with Jesus and Gordan Brown. I haven't downloaded any music or tv for years now. At one time I used it as a way to find out about new bands or bands that people recommended to me. In the end, my computer needed formatting, so music went byebye. I did go out and buy CDs for some of the bands I listened to. I've basically compiled a list in my head of all the cds I need. It's called my list of the past. When the money comes in, my collection will grow. I have found that I have used youtube quite a lot. If youtube didn't exist, then I think many bands would be unlistened to by me. So, I'm thankful of it. I was never one for downloading films, so my DVD collection is legit. But yeah, I'm trying to make more of an effort to purchase CDs and go to gigs. My collection is pretty small, but one day I hope it'll grow bigger. Like my bones.
Goafer Posted September 28, 2009 Author Posted September 28, 2009 I'm 'poor' by many standards. Why the fuck should I 'go without' because I don't happen to have as much disposable income as Tom, Dick and Harry down the street. I am without a doubt that this logic would stand up in court. I'm off to steal a Ferrari. On a side note: Welcome to capitalism. I believe that answers your question.
danny Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 I am without a doubt that this logic would stand up in court. I'm off to steal a Ferrari. On a side note: Welcome to capitalism. I believe that answers your question. Quote of the day hahaha.
Wesley Posted September 28, 2009 Posted September 28, 2009 Just to clean up what I said before (to who ever quoted me and misunderstood): I meant the technicality between stealing and copyright with filesharing was bullshit in terms of what you were doing to your beloved artists; not in terms of law and retribution. At the end of the day, Mr. Current-number-one is still not making money.
Recommended Posts