Man Arrested For Movie File-Sharing

[Kuang_Grade]

Libraries have a special rules allowing them some additional rights vs individuals as a form of public benefit. Also in the case of books (less so in other media products), the first sale doctrine also applies (if you buy it, you can do want you want with actual item you purchased, excluding reproduction...so you can give it to a friend, burn it, stick it up your ass without special permissions from the copyright owner). But the fact is that library did pay for it, and given the physical requirement of the item, there is a limit of how much "use" a item can receive (ie, only one person can use it at time) so the down side of for the copyright owner is fairly limited vs a downloadable item that could be copied by 100K people in a matter of hours.

In the case of hulu.com, last.fm, radio stations, ect, ect, all of those places are paying licensing fees to stream that content...it may be free to you, but someone paying for it.

Magazines in doctors offices are often prized positions among publishers because they mean that more than one person will be reading it, giving the publishers more "readers" to justify their ad rates. Given that most magazines and newspapers often don't even cover production/distribution costs with subscription rates, but rather make their money through advertising, these people generally don't mind other people reading the physical product even if they didn't pay anything for it.

In most electronics stores nowadays, they often show pre-cleared content on 30 minute loop via direct line....this way they can control the quality of the signal as well as content (showing the stock market tanking isn't going to help the sales of plasma TVs) and to have a range of content to show off the how good the TVs look...although many still put on football games when they are one (even though the NFL has a problem with that and they have even gone after churches with superbowl parties demanding they pay public display licensing fees). In the case of content from TV stations, a similar situation to magazines applies...they actually factor in viewers in public spaces into their ratings

At universities, free films are likely paid through the student activity fee (or are being sponsored by someone who is paying the licensing fee), so while it may seem free, the students have already paid for it.

[Mulboyne]

Really, people should realise that the world has changed, and when you can copy something without loss of quality. It loses it economic value...The days when you could control your information, be it music, text, film or whatever are over. Get used to it. Adapt.

I think in the end that's probably right but it's not unfair to point out that many pirates or consumers of pirated products come up with specious or self-deceiving arguments to justify their own behaviour. "I wouldn't have bought it anyway" surely tops the list. There are many goods and services which we subsequently regret buying, as anyone who has bitten into a convenience store sandwich will testify. However, we ought to be willing to accept responsibility for making a bad decision rather than heaping all the blame on the vendor or manufacturer. I'm also wary about using examples of companies which have thrived in spite of, or even because of, piracy because those anecdotes suffer from survivor bias. If a company fails, it isn't around to tell its story.

Digital media poses particularly acute problems for which I haven't got answers but I don't think we'll get any answers so long as pirates keep trying to convince themselves that they hold the moral high ground. Given the forum rules, it would be wrong to discuss this too much but I'm certainly no angel. Like Booger, I also want a clear legal path to get wide access to video, audio and games at times of my choosing but recognize that I'm not entitled to dictate the terms of the transaction just because I can do it illegally.

[hundefar]

Digital media poses particularly acute problems for which I haven't got answers but I don't think we'll get any answers so long as pirates keep trying to convince themselves that they hold the moral high ground.

I think that discussions of whether it is morally right are ridiculous. I also cringe when people start with "countercultural" bullshit about the record/movie industry making too much money and so on. That's not the point. The point is that whatever we might think about it, people are sharing information and they will keep on doing it. To me it seems crazy to hold on to the concepts of intellectual property in a time such as this. The idea of IP is not carved in stone or given by God, and now that technology allows us to share information in more ways than ever before, it is time to reconsider whether it is doing us any good. There are better ways to spend one's energy than trying to keep people from sharing music or whatever. That battle has already been lost. Now move on.

[Mulboyne]

Yomiuri: 2 held over music download Web site

Two Hyogo Prefecture men were arrested Tuesday on suspicion of breaching copyright by enabling mobile phone users to obtain free downloads of entire songs, police said. Keishi Fujimoto, 28, unemployed, of Himeji, and Takashi Matsuoka, 53, a company worker of Kawanishi, were arrested on suspicion of violating the Copyright Law. It is the first arrest made under the law in connection with an Internet site offering downloads of entire songs. The Kyoto prefectural police will seek to clarify the details of how the site, one of the largest-scale illegal music download sites in the nation, operated. Operated and managed by Fujimoto, the site--named Dai 3 Sekai--has more than 1 million members, and is popular among middle and high school students. According to the police, Fujimoto made it possible for an unspecified number of people in May and June to download three songs for free via the site, including "Hope or Pain," a popular song by pop singer Ayumi Hamasaki. In October 2006, Fujimoto also offered "Jonetsu Tairiku with Komatsu Ryota," an instrumental piece composed by violinist Taro Hakase, for download, with Matsuoka acting as his accomplice. Fujimoto told the police that he opened the site to profit from advertising fees. The police believe he has obtained about 120 million yen in such fees from the site. The Web site was launched around 2006, with about 20,000 songs that the suspects had downloaded from other sites and uploaded to their own.