Comments on: Apocalyptic copyright epidemic http://www.p2pnet.net/story/5847 p2pnet.net - reader powered Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:11:09 -0300 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/5847/comment-page-1#comment-18265 Reader's Write Tue, 09 Aug 2005 22:56:46 +0000 #comment-18265 "This idea of 1's and 0's being copyrighted material is sort of bogus too. It isn't like it is something tangible, say like property. If you rip the drive apart, can you show me the material? After all, it isn't fixed permanetly there." It's all part of the whole. In and of itself those zeros and ones that exist on the hard drive are meaningless, but so is the grain on celluloid film. If you rip apart a drive, no you won't be able to see the magnetic information, because we humans have a limited scope to our vision. If we could see magnetic information we'd also see the imprint on the drive platters. Just because you can't see something doesn't mean its not there. Also, there is nothing that is truly permanent, just ask the folks at the national archives trying to recover old recordings and films. “This idea of 1’s and 0’s being copyrighted material is sort of bogus too. It isn’t like it is something tangible, say like property. If you rip the drive apart, can you show me the material? After all, it isn’t fixed permanetly there.”

It’s all part of the whole. In and of itself those zeros and ones that exist on the hard drive are meaningless, but so is the grain on celluloid film. If you rip apart a drive, no you won’t be able to see the magnetic information, because we humans have a limited scope to our vision. If we could see magnetic information we’d also see the imprint on the drive platters. Just because you can’t see something doesn’t mean its not there. Also, there is nothing that is truly permanent, just ask the folks at the national archives trying to recover old recordings and films.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/5847/comment-page-1#comment-18248 Reader's Write Tue, 09 Aug 2005 10:55:47 +0000 #comment-18248 This whole thing seems bogus somehow. Isn't it the stance of the RIAA if they can see what is on your shared drive and it is what they think they own, don't they take a copy to er, prove it? Yet every computer users computer and its contents is unique in some its contents. In that, you could say that each computer is a unique in what it contains and no two are the same. Isn't part of copyright that uniqueness? That its one of a kind? For that matter if it is legal for them to get a copy of your contents, how is that different than getting a copy of a web page? They are both on the net. This idea of 1's and 0's being copyrighted material is sort of bogus too. It isn't like it is something tangible, say like property. If you rip the drive apart, can you show me the material? After all, it isn't fixed permanetly there. As it isn't permanet and can be easily changed, how is that fixed? Crap, how can it even be property? I can't even see "intellectual" as being part of the equation, considering the 1's and 0's. I am sure it is just me but the laws seem really screwed up in this aspect. How about lawyers? Constantly the infringment is being done for evidence, for information, for displays in court, yet you will be hard pressed to get so much as an acknowledgement of such infringement is even occuring. Xerox is a near household name and it is capable of just as much infringement as p2p. It makes its presence known in our courts just as easily as in our homes and businesses. So what makes lawyers above the copywrite laws in this aspect? This whole thing seems bogus somehow. Isn’t it the stance of the RIAA if they can see what is on your shared drive and it is what they think they own, don’t they take a copy to er, prove it? Yet every computer users computer and its contents is unique in some its contents. In that, you could say that each computer is a unique in what it contains and no two are the same. Isn’t part of copyright that uniqueness? That its one of a kind? For that matter if it is legal for them to get a copy of your contents, how is that different than getting a copy of a web page? They are both on the net.

This idea of 1’s and 0’s being copyrighted material is sort of bogus too. It isn’t like it is something tangible, say like property. If you rip the drive apart, can you show me the material? After all, it isn’t fixed permanetly there. As it isn’t permanet and can be easily changed, how is that fixed? Crap, how can it even be property? I can’t even see “intellectual” as being part of the equation, considering the 1’s and 0’s. I am sure it is just me but the laws seem really screwed up in this aspect.

How about lawyers? Constantly the infringment is being done for evidence, for information, for displays in court, yet you will be hard pressed to get so much as an acknowledgement of such infringement is even occuring. Xerox is a near household name and it is capable of just as much infringement as p2p. It makes its presence known in our courts just as easily as in our homes and businesses. So what makes lawyers above the copywrite laws in this aspect?

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/5847/comment-page-1#comment-18242 Reader's Write Tue, 09 Aug 2005 05:49:43 +0000 #comment-18242 Ooops! I hit the "Return" Button, instead of the "Tab" key. How many of you have been lured into sending whatever Web Page object you've been looking at to a friend or relative? What can possibly be so different in other cases? I mean: if I copy something (anything, whether it says I may or not) and send it to my brother for his information or enjoyment, what have I done wrong? After all, it was right there, hanging out in wide open cyber space for one and all to notice. If the item being sent were a favorable movie review (do they truly exist?), would the cartels take up arms against the culprit sending the review to a friend via email? Ooops! I hit the “Return” Button, instead of the “Tab” key.

How many of you have been lured into sending whatever Web Page object you’ve been looking at to a friend or relative? What can possibly be so different in other cases?

I mean: if I copy something (anything, whether it says I may or not) and send it to my brother for his information or enjoyment, what have I done wrong? After all, it was right there, hanging out in wide open cyber space for one and all to notice.

If the item being sent were a favorable movie review (do they truly exist?), would the cartels take up arms against the culprit sending the review to a friend via email?

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/5847/comment-page-1#comment-18241 Reader's Write Tue, 09 Aug 2005 05:42:12 +0000 #comment-18241