Do The Kids Think It's Stealing?

You could also substitute the MPAA for the RIAA in this cartoon:

You know it's bad when the head of Warner Music Group's kids are probably stealing music.

Comments

[Becky]

Parents are so naive when it comes to their children. My children would NEVER do that...

[gir]

I like the story on Edgar's kids. He's fairly certain his children have downloaded music illegally, and if he finds out he'll give them a talking too. Meanwhile the RIAA is out suing parents who *aren't* billionaires.

That's so twisted, I literally cannot think of anything to say.

[type-cast]

It's twisted how they portray kids as little goons. What are they, flacks for the RIAA or MPAA? DOWNLOADING IS NOT THEFT. It's a wash. Some people buy less, some buy more. I would rather listen to non-RIAA music. People need to stop supporting these losers. Don't be so sure what your kids would do, Becky. They'll treat us like thieves, no matter what we do. Do you like seeing 5 minutes of FBI warnings and piracy propaganda every time you watch a DVD? Even one you bought? I don't.

[Tester]

@Becky;

"Parents are so naive when it comes to their children. My children would NEVER do that..."

I'm a bit confused about what you posted. Are you saying that "your" children wouldn't do it or are you saying that some people think that "their" children wouldn't do it?

[Tester]

"He's fairly certain his children have downloaded music illegally, and if he finds out he'll give them a talking too. Meanwhile the RIAA is out suing parents who *aren't* billionaires.

That's so twisted, I literally cannot think of anything to say."

Do you really think he would be sued? People like that get away with murder.

[Tester]

@type-cast;

"It's twisted how they portray kids as little goons."

Who are they?

"DOWNLOADING IS NOT THEFT."

I can't agree with you on this one. No matter how you rationalize it it is stealing.

"I would rather listen to non-RIAA music. People need to stop supporting these losers."

I am in complete agreement with you. both the RIAA and the MPAA are the the gestapo from Germany. Don't get me wrong; I still feel that downloading music is stealing but I also think some of the things those two groups go after people for doing should be legal. Things like making copies of music and movies you own.

[type-cast]

@Tester:

"Who are they?"

The people on the site who drew the cartoon. It's a very negative view of children to say they're thieves for downloading information.

"I can't agree with you on this one. No matter how you rationalize it it is stealing."

If you wouldn't have bought it, downloading has not hurt them. They can argue the issues one-sided, but reality is more complex. You might buy more, less, or the same. Depriving someone of a sale is not a good analogy for theft. They're not entitled to sales. You're not depriving them of anything tangible.

"I still feel that downloading music is stealing but I also think some of the things those two groups go after people for doing should be legal. Things like making copies of music and movies you own."

Downloading is copyright infringement. They don't even go after anybody for downloading. Just uploading. If downloading's wrong, why do they only sue people for uploading? That makes no sense. We should assume it's legal, if they don't contest it in court. It's the same as common law right-of-way. By failing to SUE anybody for DOWNLOADING< they send a clear message that it's acceptable.

[type-cast]

"Things like making copies of music and movies you own."

That is another example of hypocrisy. Courts have ruled that backing up DVDs is legal. We have the right to own back-up copies, but we can't legally crack the encryption on a DVD. Copies are legal, but decryption software is illegal. They go after the enablers, instead of the leechers who create demand.

They won't be able to continue this. People can devise anonymous, encrypted, untraceable communications when they're confronted with spies and tattle-tales. For example, FreeNet or dining cryptography protocol.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dining_philosophers_problem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dining_cryptographers_protocol

[Aron]

"If you wouldn't have bought it, downloading has not hurt them. "

Here, sir, I present you a movie. I and approximately 200 others have spent the last 2 years making it, and it cost over 20 Million dollars.

Now I give you a choice - if you think you would buy this movie than you can give me 15$ and I will give you a copy. If, on the other hand, you don't think you'd buy it, I'll give it to you for free. Which will it be (and be honest)?

What's that you say? You would never buy ANY movie? Well ok, here it is for free...

What's that? Oh yes, your friends would never pay for any movie either? Oh that would be great, yes, that would be wonderful if you would do me the favor of giving them a copy for free.

Say, you wouldn't happen to know of an open job around here, perhaps down at Taco Bell would you? I might be in the market soon..

[gir]

"Do you really think he would be sued? People like that get away with murder."

No, not really. Our system is corrupt; the person who can afford the lawyers wins. That's true for all Billionaires, but he has the advantage of being an insider. Undoubtedly he'd be able to quash it in the John Doe phase, or worse use his insider status to get the case dropped without contest.

None of that changes the fact that his attitude is twisted. The only conclusion I can draw is that he doesn't really believe downloading is all that wrong (his kids will get nothing more than a talking to, and then, only if he catches them). Yet he (via his proxy, the RIAA) is suing hard working blue collar parents left and right. Why doesn't he have the RIAA send cease and desist letters instead? Twisted hypocrite.

[Tester]

@gir;

I couldn't have said it any better.

[Tester]

@type-cast;

"The people on the site who drew the cartoon. It's a very negative view of children to say they're thieves for downloading information."

If they downloaded something that is illegal to download they are stealing which does make them thieves.

"If you wouldn't have bought it, downloading has not hurt them."

You could also say the opposite; that they might have bought it if it wasn't available as a download. Let's face it, if you are ready go into a store to buy, for the sake of argument, a number of DVDs. Before you go into the store you see someone who has DVDs that he has copied and is giving them away. This person has all of the titles you want and there is no charge for them, absolutely no strings attached. You know that the majority of the people will take it for free before they spend money to get the same thing. That, unfortunately, is human nature.

"They don't even go after anybody for downloading."

They certainly do. One that comes to mind is the grandmother who was sued because of her grandchild had downloaded some music.

There have been numerous other cases as well.

[FrankLev]

___"If they downloaded something that is illegal to download they are stealing which does make them thieves."___

Doing some research will show you the term "illegal downloading" is legally meaningless. there is only illegal uploading.

___"They certainly do. One that comes to mind is the grandmother who was sued because of her grandchild had downloaded some music.
There have been numerous other cases as well."___

You are so wrong. Grandkid case was uploading. Other cases as well. Just because RIAA press releases and bad reporting say downloading when they mean uploading (distribution).

Look at the actually filed motions, discovery, et on findlaw. the action being cited is always uploadng no matter if people are using incorrect term.

[Tester]

@FrankLev;

I don't have the time to verify what you have said so, at least for now, I will take your word on it.

I find it interesting though that you didn't comment on something else I said in the same post. Since it appears from your responses that you don't have a problem with illegal downloading I would like your thoughts on what I said. So you don't have to go back I'll say it again;

In response to;

"If you wouldn't have bought it, downloading has not hurt them."

I posted the following;

"You could also say the opposite; that they might have bought it if it wasn't available as a download. Let's face it, if you are ready go into a store to buy, for the sake of argument, a number of DVDs. Before you go into the store you see someone who has DVDs that he has copied and is giving them away. This person has all of the titles you want and there is no charge for them, absolutely no strings attached. You know that the majority of the people will take it for free before they spend money to get the same thing. That, unfortunately, is human nature."