PDA

View Full Version : Piracy: Good or bad?


aRedMoon
June 27th, 2004, 12:09 PM
It was Abby's idea in a way. :P


Do you think piracy is good or bad? Sure, it does hurt companies to a point, but on the other hand, not everyone has the money to buy the $400 program that you could just download for free on certain sites. o_O

Master Kwesi Nkromah
June 27th, 2004, 12:25 PM
It's bad anyway you cut it....
that being said, it doesn't mean people still won't do it..
by people... i mean me.

Sakura and Espeon
June 27th, 2004, 12:30 PM
It's bad because if you get pirated software, you get no service support and also you might not get the software, you might get a virus. Also it's stealing too, equivant of stealing music. :'(

aRedMoon
June 27th, 2004, 12:49 PM
Hmm, more people have done the "Both Sides" lol...

I pirate some stuff, I buy others. It really depends on the program. If I really like it, and I have the money, then I'll go out and buy a legal version (IE DeadAIM) but if I just use it occasionally or it's just too much for me to afford, then I'll keep the pirated version.

DragonTrainer
June 27th, 2004, 12:49 PM
I use to have Kazaa Lite, but I got rid of it, I guess it's ok for music, most music artists make their money from concerts and stuff, so they're rich wether you buy the music or not, and you aren't gonna stop piracy anytime soon, so meh

~DragonTrainer:dragonite

aRedMoon
June 27th, 2004, 12:52 PM
lol... I refuse to use anything that connects to the kazza network, just because that's where the RIAA hang out. I prefer to use WinMX, and I don't even use that very often anymore.

DragonTrainer
June 27th, 2004, 12:55 PM
Well, technically it was a hacked version of Kazaa, so eh. There's so many piracy programs out there it isn't even funny >_>. I ahd WinMX once, but I never figured out how to use it, so now when I listen to music, I'll stick to media player ;)

~DragonTrainer:dragonite

Frostweaver
June 27th, 2004, 12:59 PM
"anything that costs money doesn't exist"

Well I only see one option on this poll! Hmm.. guess I have no choice but to choose piracy... not that I do it except for ROMs anyway (not because I'm a man full of moral, but because I don't know how)

Flaming Torchic
June 27th, 2004, 12:59 PM
I voted for "both sides have their points", I'll explain why...

I agree why people would want to get music illegally, on account that it costs from 15 - 20 dollars for each CD that you buy, and you may only want it for a couple of songs, and not for every song on it (meaning you may end up paying for more then you want. Just say there are 8 CDs that you want, but you only want to listen to a couple on each, you would end up paying more then $100 for only about 16 songs, is that really fair? Of course it isn't. I know that it is impossible to only get the songs you want on one CD, but that's why I agree with downloading music.

I don't agree with people downloading movies, although. First of all, I don't even know why people would bother downloading it (unless they are VERY poor), because it is only $5 to go and see it at the theatre, and it would be in MUCH better quality. Like that commercial about movie pirating says: "Movies, they're worth it".

Frostweaver
June 27th, 2004, 01:04 PM
Ahem... I'll speak for those "why people would bother downloading movies." I don't download any (because once again I don't know how or where), but I certainly understand why...

a) parent's won't allow them to go
b) cost (oh right watching a movie once a week is equal to 40 bucks cdn a month)
c) don't forget those transportation fee that adds up to a few more dollars with oil price THIS HIGH
d) watch it again for free... downloaded movies are certainly very helpful for people who likes to watch a movie again, like RotK for the 5th time. (but I'll rather say "Return of my 8 Bucks that I used to watch this overrated crap that bored the heck out of me for 2 hours and more')

Kipkip
June 27th, 2004, 01:15 PM
I said no. They're ripping artist and programs off of the money they should get. I don't see a reason for it. There are many free alternatives and most of the time, the free alternative is better or the same and usually opened source which means many delevopers are making it better. :D

aRedMoon
June 27th, 2004, 02:12 PM
Well, technically it was a hacked version of Kazaa, so ehIt still connects to the Kazza network... >_>I ahd WinMX once, but I never figured out how to use itIt isn't that hard. O_oI agree why people would want to get music illegally, on account that it costs from 15 - 20 dollars for each CD that you buy, and you may only want it for a couple of songs, and not for every song on it (meaning you may end up paying for more then you want. Just say there are 8 CDs that you want, but you only want to listen to a couple on each, you would end up paying more then $100 for only about 16 songs, is that really fair? Of course it isn't. I know that it is impossible to only get the songs you want on one CD, but that's why I agree with downloading music.That's why they have those programs like Napster or whatever where you pay per song. =/I don't agree with people downloading movies, although. First of all, I don't even know why people would bother downloading it (unless they are VERY poor), because it is only $5 to go and see it at the theatre, and it would be in MUCH better quality. Like that commercial about movie pirating says: "Movies, they're worth it".I downloaded RotK, and watched a bit of it, just to see if it would be worth seeing in theatures. The only reason I did go to see it is because I downloaded it beforehand and previewed it.They're ripping artist and programs off of the money they should get.Someone has to buy the original thing to upload it, and not everyone has the net. Artists and companies still make plenty of money. =/

aaaaaa
June 27th, 2004, 03:11 PM
Well I like to trial out my software first.
And if that trial means I use it indefinately, but never like it to the point of purchase, then so be it.
I've never liked Windows enough to stop trialing it, and start using it, for example.
So I've never paid for it.
I did however purchase Photoshop 7 legitimently.
But I pirated 8 recently, because I don't feel I should have to pay for the new version.
Movies and Music are somewhat subjective. They come down to respect. I'll always pay to see a James Cameron film, and I own 100's of CD's from artists I respect.
But for every movie I pay for, there's a dozen I didn't, and every CD I own, there's ten I don't.
So um, yeah.

Is it right? Is it wrong?
Legitimency is expensive, because of pirates.
Pirates exist, because legitimency is expensive.
How the how can you pick right and wrong out've that?

Gr8person62.2
June 27th, 2004, 06:37 PM
I voted for good, because it is in it's own way. On most occasions piracy actually promotes the stuff you get. There are many reasons why piracy is good in it's own way. Theres no doubt it's gonna happen and it's not actually as bad as the government make it sound. If the companies where smart enough they could use this piracy for their own good. Take anime for example. Creators of anime/manga arn't against the idea that they're anime/manga get "pirated" on the internet. Because of that, they have a much, much larger audience and was actually one of the main reasons how anime came to be in the western world.
The music situation..... I agree. I wouldn't wanna go pay $30 to listen to a song. To me, downloading a song is like waiting to listen to it on the radio, except without the waiting part. If music was really cheap to buy, then YA! I would go and buy, but too bad their greedy.

Sakura and Espeon
June 27th, 2004, 07:02 PM
Piracy isn't a good thing because it only hurts company. If you download music, you are hurting the Record Industry. The RIAA is losing money and also the artist. The Artist gets half or some of the money of each album to live on. If you download music for free, you are stealing. Downloading Free Music is like shoplifting something from a store. Also, it's illegal to do this also.

Frostweaver
June 27th, 2004, 07:07 PM
It's times like these when I am so proud of my country: Canada! (completely and utterly legal to download)

Riiight... I'm paying 30 bucks for a CD, and a blank CD cost less than 50 cents... I wonder who's being ripped off? They do make PLENTY of profit, enough to cover the cost of making the CD and gain a huge sum of cash...

If piracy is really so evil, I wonder why do they make CD/DVD burners available to household computers... I mean I can pool money together with 20 friends (ok I really don't have more than one friend IRL but let's pretend) to buy a CD for something, then make 20 copies with the burners... hmm... when CD/DVD burning is legal, yet downloading them is illegal... what logic is that?

Dizzy
June 27th, 2004, 07:12 PM
It's totally good, especially for exploition, and for making people (Artists especially) more popular. If it wasnt for KaZaA i wouldn't have known many good Techno songs, and my friends and I wouldnt stress a certain Dj for this reason.

Sakura and Espeon
June 27th, 2004, 07:13 PM
Illegal downloading hurts everyone, but buring CDs of artist's music isn't illegal. They didn't come up a law that will stop, so CD burning illegal music would be legal?

The problem is, the RIAA is charging too much for CDs. CDs with burned music isn't susposed to cost that much. I think the RIAA make the CDs price high due to downloading so more people would download off the internet. Also, services like iTunes and Napster isn't aviliable in all countries, so if a person only wants a single song off a CD and they couldn't buy music, they have one choice, download it for free.

aRedMoon
June 27th, 2004, 07:22 PM
-.-;

Downloading music and then burning it is illegal. However, making a personal back-up of a CD is legal. You aren't allowed to give that CD to anyone else, however, lawfully.

The world of piracy is quite screwed over. In the days before the RIAA started making such a big fuss about it, there wasn't quite so much debate about it. >> I miss those days. <<

Dizzy
June 27th, 2004, 07:24 PM
Oh well, everyone burns Cds of music hear, even cops! If The RIAA dropped CD prices maybe people would buy them. We don't have to listen to the law if we don't want to, especially stupid ones. GO CANADA

Kipkip
June 27th, 2004, 07:31 PM
Well, why lower prices of CDs? CDs are outdated. You guys must be stuck in 2003. :shocked:
MP3's are the way to go. On programs such as iTunes, Napster 2.0, Musicmatch, and Walmart.com the songs are $.99 per song. You don't even have to buy the whole CD. Walmart.com has them for $.88 per song. This is a cheaper way than a CD.

Sakura and Espeon
June 27th, 2004, 07:35 PM
Yes, downloading music legally is cheaper than buying a whole CD, although you need a fast connection. It probally costs 8 dollars for a whole album which is cheaper than buying a whole CD and you can burn it or send it to a portable device. ^_^

aRedMoon
June 27th, 2004, 07:51 PM
That'll become the best way to get music legally in the future...

Or just moving to Canada. One of the two.

Kairi
June 27th, 2004, 09:42 PM
It's times like these when I am so proud of my country: Canada! (completely and utterly legal to download)

Riiight... I'm paying 30 bucks for a CD, and a blank CD cost less than 50 cents... I wonder who's being ripped off? They do make PLENTY of profit, enough to cover the cost of making the CD and gain a huge sum of cash...

If piracy is really so evil, I wonder why do they make CD/DVD burners available to household computers... I mean I can pool money together with 20 friends (ok I really don't have more than one friend IRL but let's pretend) to buy a CD for something, then make 20 copies with the burners... hmm... when CD/DVD burning is legal, yet downloading them is illegal... what logic is that?The logic in that is you can burn data to CDs, they're a lot more than just a music medium. @_@;

Gr8person62.2
June 29th, 2004, 12:18 AM
You also have to take into account that music you download is never CD quality. It's always around 192kbps. Not many people can tell the difference(I can) but thats besides my point.
The um... legal thingo, dunno what ya call it -_-'(bleh) states that even if you buy a CD/DVD, you don't own the content, you only own the medium... so get this, we're paying $30 for something that costs 50, and we don't own whats on it. The contect is owned only by the copyright holder. We only own the rights to make use of the content in whatever way it was intended to be used. If you payed good money for a pay per view event, you only own the right to see that paper per view, at that time, only. Even though you payed money, your not allowed to own it in any other way. Say your TV blew up because you spilled orange juice on it. It's actually illigal to get your friend, who has also payed for it, to tape it for you and get you to watch it later, or download a copy of the internet. What you actually bought with that money is the right to watch it only. Buying a music CD gives you the right to listen to it, not manipulate it.
So when you really take into account those laws, you'll be like wtf^? Your not allowed to rip a DVD and make a music video out of it. Your not allowed to rip a song and create your own remix. But don't we see that everywhere, everyday, all the time? I think we do. My point is that piracy is not a big issue, it never was. The RIAA just can't accept the fact that this stuff happens in our day and age. It's allways been happening! It was only just recently they decided to take action and make it sound like "Oh no we're so broke now".
ALSO! wasn't it recenty declared by some judge(for USA only) that you was allowed to download music, but not allowed to share it? I heard it was. I dunno why RIAA is still suing people. Actually they havn't, it's some European music industry that sued, I think 200(around) people. That was the most recent. Meh ~ I'l shut up.....