Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

no that is really not possible. There is no way for the computer or the printer to know if you are infringing on copyrighted materials or not. I mean, what would it do, check your printed job to a data base of copyrighted materials?

As far as materials go, I would assume you are locked in to using a certain set of plastics to print with, but I don't know those specifics all that well. I never really used them before but had to install a couple once and then make a few computers print to them. They take FOREVER too. They were pretty neat though.

I'm sure corporations would try and come up with some way to try and stop people from making illegal copies of their products. Wether or not it would be very effective is anyone's guess. But i doubt they would just throw up their hands in defeat.

i know, what i was saying would be if GW SOMEHOW developed a plastic that showed up as invisible on the scanners or something like that, it would be like a metal detector trying to pick up plastic or one of those airport security things not being able to see certain materials.

Canadian 5th wrote:Life has always been about doing the best for yourself. If I can help a few people along the way I might, but my won success comes first.

Ah, so your selfish basically. Got it.

No, I'm not. You still have your book, everybody who ever bought it still has it. You simply didn't get paid for my enjoyment of the book. However I could always read your book for free at a library so what's your point? Do you hate libraries now as well?

Yes, but you still stole that one copy of my book.

No, because either: a) I CHOSE to give the library a copy of my book or b) the library bought it. If someone asks me for a free copy of a book, I'd consider it! When I have a problem is when someone deciddes that they are entitled to my book without either contacting me to see if it's ok, or to just pay the price.

Books and everything are luxuries. If you don't want to pay, then you do without. You have no 'right' to entertainment.

Or I can tune into the radio, to here another artist's work, or go on youtube and type their name in, or even download it. Artists make more money from a concert tour than they do from CD's and song sales so I like hurting the label and supporting the artist.

Fair enough, so go watch their concerts. Just don't steal from them. You do know that the radio PAYS for the right to play for the song, yes?

Because you can't stop me. The strong rule the weak. So keep writing and I'll enjoy it for free if I so desire.

So you're an immoral . =Shakes head= I have nothing to say to that. You have made your own immorality quite clear to everyone here, and I think that speaks for itself. I honestly don't know how to deal with someone who has such a skewed view of morality.

Once again, I want to apply your logic to other forms of crime. To be honest, I'm a Hobbesian, and people like you only reinforce my belief that the masses of humanity need a strong government to smash them into submission.

That was one who didn't pirate. So 29 of 30 is a vast majority.

But what if we make it 29/x ? I sincerely hope that the majority of people on this planet aren't as immoral as you.

dajobe wrote:no i meant like a certain material that would not register with the copiers or a little device that feths up your printer if you try to put it inside, because i doubt if many companies who produce physical products like toys and models want their products being copied for free and would probably put in alot of research and technology to find a way to make it impossible

How can it mess up your scanning device? You have a scanner that can be as simple as a turntable and some cameras at the low end, how do you break that with a model? How does the printing get broken by the scan> A bad quality printer or scanner will have lots of noise and flash, but again nothing broken.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dajobe wrote:i know, what i was saying would be if GW SOMEHOW developed a plastic that showed up as invisible on the scanners or something like that, it would be like a metal detector trying to pick up plastic or one of those airport security things not being able to see certain materials.

Not possible, try logic next time.

Crom wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Okay, I'm in a technologies course in college, we did a survey in class and one out of 30 people asked didn't torrent most music and video. That one person who didn't was older so it wasn't that surprising. So they would need one hell of a lawsuit to nail everybody that does it.

If you had done a survey 30 years ago you would have found that only one out of 30 students didn't dub tapes. I used to. It's what students do.

This is why I think GW should change their business model on their books for digital downloads. Make it a reasonable yearly subscription rate of like $99 a year and you get all their rule books, army books, that can work in any laptop, desktop, tablet or ereader device and I bet a lot of those pirates may just cough up the $100 a year to access everything in digital format. I mean it is already in digital format before they print it anyway. There is way less over head when doing ebooks, and if done right you can get a yearly subscription off your customers, which in the long run would be a lot higher of profit.

I work in IT in academia and I can tell you the publishing companies are decades behind every other media company because they are scared. They are scared that new digital business models will destroy them and their profits, so they push their old and busted business model. Look at the music industry and video games. I don't think I've bought a retail PC game from a store in a long time. I just buy everything from Steam these days. iTunes Music Store has sold 100s of billions of songs. The digital business model works, and it can be very profitable.

Too bad most companies won't jump on it.

Personally I believe digital copying will destroy the music industry as we know it.

It's built on two concepts.

1. The editorial function of discovering and developing new talent.
2. The difficulty and expense of physically copying music. (C90 cassettes used to cost £1 each, in the days when £1 actually was worth something.)

Arguably the music publishers have abandoned their responsibility for editorial in favour of sending out derivative crap.

The Internet offers bands the chance to build a following by themselves by word of mouth. Live music can't be copied by definition.

There is already a massive back catalogue of awesome music available.

I see the future as real enthusiasts going to paid-for gigs, while most people download stuff for free or a modest monthly subscription.

ChrisWWII wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:Life has always been about doing the best for yourself. If I can help a few people along the way I might, but my won success comes first.

Ah, so your selfish basically. Got it.

You want your book to outsell other books right? You're selfish too.

Yes, but you still stole that one copy of my book.

No, because either: a) I CHOSE to give the library a copy of my book or b) the library bought it. If someone asks me for a free copy of a book, I'd consider it! When I have a problem is when someone deciddes that they are entitled to my book without either contacting me to see if it's ok, or to just pay the price.

Books and everything are luxuries. If you don't want to pay, then you do without. You have no 'right' to entertainment.

So the library buys a copy and everybody can read it. Would you call it illegal if I read the book, returned it, and due to a good memory wrote down a copy later?

Fair enough, so go watch their concerts. Just don't steal from them. You do know that the radio PAYS for the right to play for the song, yes?

Actually you're wrong on that. The radio station doesn't pay for the rights to a song, they pay the licensing body for the right to broadcast. The licensing body hammers out buying rights to songs.

So you're an immoral . =Shakes head= I have nothing to say to that. You have made your own immorality quite clear to everyone here, and I think that speaks for itself. I honestly don't know how to deal with someone who has such a skewed view of morality.

Once again, I want to apply your logic to other forms of crime. To be honest, I'm a Hobbesian, and people like you only reinforce my belief that the masses of humanity need a strong government to smash them into submission.

Your a crackpot who welcomes a dictatorship then. You would have loved Germany in the 1930's.

But what if we make it 29/x ? I sincerely hope that the majority of people on this planet aren't as immoral as you.

Even at say 29/29 in the real world, that's still 50%. Hell, my parents pirate music and movies, not to the extent I do, but they do it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:Personally I believe digital copying will destroy the music industry as we know it.

It's built on two concepts.

1. The editorial function of discovering and developing new talent.
2. The difficulty and expense of physically copying music. (C90 cassettes used to cost £1 each, in the days when £1 actually was worth something.)

Arguably the music publishers have abandoned their responsibility for editorial in favour of sending out derivative crap.

The Internet offers bands the chance to build a following by themselves by word of mouth. Live music can't be copied by definition.

There is already a massive back catalogue of awesome music available.

I see the future as real enthusiasts going to paid-for gigs, while most people download stuff for free or a modest monthly subscription.

Yeah, I think you have the model about right. Free downloads and onsite ads would also work for some bands.

dajobe wrote:i know, what i was saying would be if GW SOMEHOW developed a plastic that showed up as invisible on the scanners or something like that, it would be like a metal detector trying to pick up plastic or one of those airport security things not being able to see certain materials.

The only way for this to work is if GW developed a completely 100% clear plastic... the fix to this would be to paint it...

Chris WWII: cant believe im defending canadian, but i do agree that every person in this world is out for what they think is best for themselves. other than that, spot on.

Canadian 5th: apparently you dont read anything, or just choose to see what you want to because you missed the SOMEHOW, i used that word because i dont know how they would do it, but technology is amazing and i think that you would be surprised at what many companies can come up with...how about you try to be a little less ebrasive next time?

Killkrazy: no clue where music industry is goin, lol

canadian the whole point of that 29/x was the fact that you need a much larger group then just 30 people in order to actually make a realistic stat for what you are trying to claim.

dajobe wrote:Canadian 5th: apparently you dont read anything, or just choose to see what you want to because you missed the SOMEHOW, i used that word because i dont know how they would do it, but technology is amazing and i think that you would be surprised at what many companies can come up with...how about you try to be a little less ebrasive next time?

Waving your hands and saying somehow isn't a solid argument. Besides, how well does DRM work today... Cracked before launch, oh bother.

Canadian 5th wrote:
You want your book to outsell other books right? You're selfish too.

The difference being I want my book to outsell other books by being BETTER than them. I would be selfish if I tried to cheat the system like you are.

So the library buys a copy and everybody can read it. Would you call it illegal if I read the book, returned it, and due to a good memory wrote down a copy later?

If you're able to do that then fine. Go apply for a job at the CIA, they'd love someone with that kind of memory.

Actually you're wrong on that. The radio station doesn't pay for the rights to a song, they pay the licensing body for the right to broadcast. The licensing body hammers out buying rights to songs.

The point being at some time along the line the radio station got an agreement to play the song legally.

You never did.

Your a crackpot who welcomes a dictatorship then. You would have loved Germany in the 1930's.

I hereby award you the award of being the first person to fulfill Godwin's Law in this thread.

To be perfectly honest, yes. If we can get a WORKING benevolent dictatorship I'd be all for it. The problem is that we can't get a working benevolent dictatorship because humans as a rule are greedy sons of . Democracy is an idiotic form of government that only works because every other form of government is worse.

Nazi Germany was NOT a benevolent dictatorship. Maybe they'd have a shot if it weren't for that whole 'kill anyone who's not our race' thing.

Even at say 29/29 in the real world, that's still 50%. Hell, my parents pirate music and movies, not to the extent I do, but they do it.

I know lots of people who pirate. I don't care about them. People who pirate because they're cheap, or they want to try something out...fine.

it's people like you who think that they are entitled to free everything, and that they will break any law they want to as long as they don't get caught that destroy my faith in humanity.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:canadian the whole point of that 29/x was the fact that you need a much larger group then just 30 people in order to actually make a realistic stat for what you are trying to claim.

No duh, I suppose I could check site traffic for a place like TPB though. Which shows that they get 3,715,515 unique visitors monthly the other top ten sites also get near or over 1 million views per month. Now that does show what would seem to be a small number. But you have to consider that sites like youtube and hulu mean that you can find music and TV shows, which are what people mostly want, easy enough for free.

well if you already new that then why try and pass off your little 1/29 ratio as being an actual vast majority stat like you were?

ChrisWWII wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:
You want your book to outsell other books right? You're selfish too.

The difference being I want my book to outsell other books by being BETTER than them. I would be selfish if I tried to cheat the system like you are.

I'll get your book for free by being smarter than you then.

If you're able to do that then fine. Go apply for a job at the CIA, they'd love someone with that kind of memory.

Not an American... Besides, you just said that copying your book is fine.

The point being at some time along the line the radio station got an agreement to play the song legally.

You never did.

Actually I can play whatever I like so long as it's not for profit and I get a license. Woops!

I hereby award you the award of being the first person to fulfill Godwin's Law in this thread.

To be perfectly honest, yes. If we can get a WORKING benevolent dictatorship I'd be all for it. The problem is that we can't get a working benevolent dictatorship because humans as a rule are greedy sons of . Democracy is an idiotic form of government that only works because every other form of government is worse.

Nazi Germany was NOT a benevolent dictatorship. Maybe they'd have a shot if it weren't for that whole 'kill anyone who's not our race' thing.

Yawn, a Godwin's law reference... How original.

I know lots of people who pirate. I don't care about them. People who pirate because they're cheap, or they want to try something out...fine.

it's people like you who think that they are entitled to free everything, and that they will break any law they want to as long as they don't get caught that destroy my faith in humanity.

Well I have broken a few laws in my day, though there are some I won't break. Murder and rape are certainly lines not worth crossing for moral reasons, as is kidnapping, torture, and the like.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Commisar Wolfie wrote:well if you already new that then why try and pass off your little 1/29 ratio as being an actual vast majority stat like you were?

It is a vast majority of a small sample group from a certain demographic. While not significant on the whole it does cover a significant number of people in the course and in the college as a whole.

Canadian 5th wrote:

dajobe wrote:Canadian 5th: apparently you dont read anything, or just choose to see what you want to because you missed the SOMEHOW, i used that word because i dont know how they would do it, but technology is amazing and i think that you would be surprised at what many companies can come up with...how about you try to be a little less ebrasive next time?

Waving your hands and saying somehow isn't a solid argument. Besides, how well does DRM work today... Cracked before launch, oh bother.

i never said it was an arguement, i said that I PREDICT that companies will try to do something to fight people from copying their product.
Digital Rights Management? dont know that much about the tech industry, i know that DRM is a contoversial topic and that it currently has some problems...does that mean that they will never be fixed...maybe, or maybe not. one thing that i do know is that your logic makes me , and everytime i say something civil, you come back with some unnecessarily snotty remark, and you are sort of coming across as a bag IMHO.

That still doesn't explain why try and pass it off as something much more then what it was. yes that ratio is good for that class and a small group but unless your college is really small a sample group of only 30 people is not enough.

dajobe wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

dajobe wrote:Canadian 5th: apparently you dont read anything, or just choose to see what you want to because you missed the SOMEHOW, i used that word because i dont know how they would do it, but technology is amazing and i think that you would be surprised at what many companies can come up with...how about you try to be a little less ebrasive next time?

Waving your hands and saying somehow isn't a solid argument. Besides, how well does DRM work today... Cracked before launch, oh bother.

i never said it was an arguement, i said that I PREDICT that companies will try to do something to fight people from copying their product.
Digital Rights Management? dont know that much about the tech industry, i know that DRM is a contoversial topic and that it currently has some problems...does that mean that they will never be fixed...maybe, or maybe not. one thing that i do know is that your logic makes me , and everytime i say something civil, you come back with some unnecessarily snotty remark, and you are sort of coming across as a bag IMHO.

DRM is always going to be crackable because the codes to crack it are, by necessity, located within the product being sold. Again something research would cover.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Crom wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Canadian 5th wrote:

Okay, I'm in a technologies course in college, we did a survey in class and one out of 30 people asked didn't torrent most music and video. That one person who didn't was older so it wasn't that surprising. So they would need one hell of a lawsuit to nail everybody that does it.

If you had done a survey 30 years ago you would have found that only one out of 30 students didn't dub tapes. I used to. It's what students do.

This is why I think GW should change their business model on their books for digital downloads. Make it a reasonable yearly subscription rate of like $99 a year and you get all their rule books, army books, that can work in any laptop, desktop, tablet or ereader device and I bet a lot of those pirates may just cough up the $100 a year to access everything in digital format. I mean it is already in digital format before they print it anyway. There is way less over head when doing ebooks, and if done right you can get a yearly subscription off your customers, which in the long run would be a lot higher of profit.

I work in IT in academia and I can tell you the publishing companies are decades behind every other media company because they are scared. They are scared that new digital business models will destroy them and their profits, so they push their old and busted business model. Look at the music industry and video games. I don't think I've bought a retail PC game from a store in a long time. I just buy everything from Steam these days. iTunes Music Store has sold 100s of billions of songs. The digital business model works, and it can be very profitable.

Too bad most companies won't jump on it.

Personally I believe digital copying will destroy the music industry as we know it.

It's built on two concepts.

1. The editorial function of discovering and developing new talent.
2. The difficulty and expense of physically copying music. (C90 cassettes used to cost £1 each, in the days when £1 actually was worth something.)

Arguably the music publishers have abandoned their responsibility for editorial in favour of sending out derivative crap.

The Internet offers bands the chance to build a following by themselves by word of mouth. Live music can't be copied by definition.

There is already a massive back catalogue of awesome music available.

I see the future as real enthusiasts going to paid-for gigs, while most people download stuff for free or a modest monthly subscription.

I don't disagree with a statement you have made, but I would like to add a few things. I collect records, as in vinyl records. Have done so since I was a kid, and my parents bought me Michael Jackson's Thriller on viynl. I thought the concept of an album was just awesome as a kid. You get the cover, liner notes, lyric sheets, cool art that doesn't come with a CD, etc. In fact the last album I bought was last year, and it was Them Crooked Vultures on 2x 180gram cherry red vinyl records. The record was $17 (sort of pricey for brand new vinyl) but came with a free digital download of their album. So, I got the record and I got a code to redeem my free online digital download. SOLD!

However, I am definitely a try before I buy music fan these days. I will download tracks of an album before I buy (there are a few artists I buy their albums regardless if I like it or not,I am a completest with some music acts and I want their whole catalog) and if I can I will buy it on vinyl keeping the digital copies I already downloaded.

Then there are the artists that I may stream on say grooveshark.com and not really be that in to them at all, but I might go see them live. Buy a T-Shirt or something, maybe a sticker, so they are getting ticket sales and merch sales from me.

Basically in this day and age it allows for the bands to be more business savvy and start their own label, put out their own album and manage their own business instead of letting a bunch of lawyers and business dudes handle it. Which I think that is a good thing for the artist. Also, when I go to a live show, they are getting paid for that, and the record company gets no cut of it, same thing when I buy merch directly from the artist.

As far as the big 4 record companies go, let them burn for all I care. I just want good music and I would much rather pay the artist than the label.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:That still doesn't explain why try and pass it off as something much more then what it was. yes that ratio is good for that class and a small group but unless your college is really small a sample group of only 30 people is not enough.

Actually for a school of say 1,000 a sample size of 30 gives a confidence interval of 17 which means +/- 17% so that means that I can say with 95% certainty that between 0.1% and 20% of people at my school wouldn't download music.

chaos0xomega wrote:

dajobe wrote:i know, what i was saying would be if GW SOMEHOW developed a plastic that showed up as invisible on the scanners or something like that, it would be like a metal detector trying to pick up plastic or one of those airport security things not being able to see certain materials.

The only way for this to work is if GW developed a completely 100% clear plastic... the fix to this would be to paint it...

I was going to say that anything un-scanable can be remedied by painting it a solid color. Though most 3D print jobs come from some sort of 3D rendering and not really a scan, at least the ones I am familiar with.

Ok yes for a school that size then yes that sample level does work. The point I was making that you seemed to have trouble grasping was the whole issue of sample size verse what size group you are trying to represent. The way you presented it seemd to implay that you meant for that 1/29 ratio to be accurate for say the entire country. Thank you for finally actualy answering the question.

everything is crackable, the issue is how crackable it is, and i am sure that there are ways to make it more difficult to access the codes for people who do not just wish to just use whatever the product is. Maybe a failsafe that wipes the program if it senses it is being accessed in an undesirable way. I dont know, im not into tech. What I do know is that there are very smart people who will be paid alot of money to figure such things out. Whether they will or not remains to be determined, I am just argueing that copyright is wrong and that companies will always strive to protect what is their property from thiefs, and that I believe if the government catches someone pirating, that the person should be imprisoned.

and that was a little bit less rude response. we are making progress!

Crom wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

dajobe wrote:i know, what i was saying would be if GW SOMEHOW developed a plastic that showed up as invisible on the scanners or something like that, it would be like a metal detector trying to pick up plastic or one of those airport security things not being able to see certain materials.

The only way for this to work is if GW developed a completely 100% clear plastic... the fix to this would be to paint it...

I was going to say that anything un-scanable can be remedied by painting it a solid color. Though most 3D print jobs come from some sort of 3D rendering and not really a scan, at least the ones I am familiar with.

Thats the truth. I've seen shops/individuals running scanning tech before, but from what I've seen its usually used to conduct computational analysis of a real world object that wasn't designed via a digital process rather than to create something for printing.

dajobe wrote:no i meant like a certain material that would not register with the copiers or a little device that feths up your printer if you try to put it inside, because i doubt if many companies who produce physical products like toys and models want their products being copied for free and would probably put in alot of research and technology to find a way to make it impossible

If that was even possible, you'd end up with a situation at hand that boggles the mind of any company lawyer (in most countries). Not only would the person whose printer got destroyed be able to sue the company which designed or owns the copyright of the print since they knowingly destroyed someone else's property, but the person whose printer was destroyed would also be able to claim warranty from the company which made the printer, or at the very least the retailer where it was bought. All the while not actually committing a crime since the actual 3D print (and thus infringement on the copyrighted material) was never printed, and since it's intellectual property it's not a crime to have access to it. In fact, in certain countries reproducing the 3D print would be in the grey zone if it was for your own personal use.

Now, what would be interesting to know is if you purchased, for example, an assembled GW model and used a 3D printer to get both an image of it and then recreate it for personal use - in how many countries this would even be illegal. Keep in mind that we're talking about making an image of an object that you own.

Edit: added assembled for clarity.

Canadian 5th wrote:
Actually for a school of say 1,000 a sample size of 30 gives a confidence interval of 17 which means +/- 17% so that means that I can say with 95% certainty that between 0.1% and 20% of people at my school wouldn't download music.

Even though I hate studying statistics, I know enough to say that between .1% to 20% is an unacceptably wide interval. Sure you can say that the majority of people download music, but the percentage can vary from 'almost everyone' to 'a significant majority'.

Besides, I'm more interested in WHY. Do they download it because they just don't want to pay? Or do they download because they want to sample with the intention of buying later? Or are they like you and think that their entitled to free entertainment.

I'll get your book for free by being smarter than you then.

By breaking the law and cheating the system. I could ensure my book succeeds by breaking the law and screwing up the competitors, but I don't because if I'm going to win I'm going to compete and win fairly.

Not an American... Besides, you just said that copying your book is fine.

By acknowledging that the situation you proposed was so ridiculously unlikely that someone with that kind of ability would have much better things to do than steal some guys book.

If someone took my book, copied it onto his ocmputer and started posting it online then I'd be pissed. You know why? Because now I'm being hurt. People are getting access to a service I'm providing for free, when I don't want them to have it for free. I'm taking a loss. Or someone is.

Actually I can play whatever I like so long as it's not for profit and I get a license. Woops!

Stop playing semantics. You know what I mean. The radio station got a license to play the music legally. if you can get the same license, then bully for you.

However I doubt that.

Well I have broken a few laws in my day, though there are some I won't break. Murder and rape are certainly lines not worth crossing for moral reasons, as is kidnapping, torture, and the like.

You yourself have said that the only way you'd stop pirating (breaking the law) is when they can stop you. I'm only applying your logic to other forms of crime.

Commisar Wolfie wrote:Ok yes for a school that size then yes that sample level does work. The point I was making that you seemed to have trouble grasping was the whole issue of sample size verse what size group you are trying to represent. The way you presented it seemd to implay that you meant for that 1/29 ratio to be accurate for say the entire country. Thank you for finally actualy answering the question.

When did I ever say country? I said it was a sample from a class.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dajobe wrote:everything is crackable, the issue is how crackable it is, and i am sure that there are ways to make it more difficult to access the codes for people who do not just wish to just use whatever the product is. Maybe a failsafe that wipes the program if it senses it is being accessed in an undesirable way. I dont know, im not into tech. What I do know is that there are very smart people who will be paid alot of money to figure such things out. Whether they will or not remains to be determined, I am just argueing that copyright is wrong and that companies will always strive to protect what is their property from thiefs, and that I believe if the government catches someone pirating, that the person should be imprisoned.

and that was a little bit less rude response. we are making progress!

So you don't know a lick of what you're talking about when it comes to DRM. Why do you keep babbling then?

Commisar Wolfie wrote:Ok yes for a school that size then yes that sample level does work. The point I was making that you seemed to have trouble grasping was the whole issue of sample size verse what size group you are trying to represent. The way you presented it seemd to implay that you meant for that 1/29 ratio to be accurate for say the entire country. Thank you for finally actualy answering the question.

He also polled a demographic of students, which are assuming to be young and perhaps naive with how the world works. Though I am willing to be more people in the USA download music than say smoke pot, and many polls have shown that over 50% of Americans at one time or still do, smoke pot. I am not sure if he was making the point that if everyone does it, make it legal, or what, but nothing will ever stop digital piracy. Everyone on the Internet is guilty of downloading something pirated at one time or another.

I don't think anyone should face jail time, especially if they are also buying items as well. I also think that companies that claim to lose revenue over digital piracy are lying out their butts. They claim to lose 100s of thousands of dollars to one person, like that person every had 100+K to waste on music. How about that single mom that her 10 year old downloaded 2 albums and they tried to sue her for 300,000 dollars....for 2 albums? If anything you should owe the current retail value of what you downloaded and be sentenced to community service. Let's at least be reasonable here, no one has money to buy every DVD or album they want, so there will always be downloading, but many people who pirate also go out and buy stuff.

and you passed it off trying to make it seem like you meant it for something larger then just that class. Which I stated several times earlier. Try reading full posts.

ChrisWWII wrote:Even though I hate studying statistics, I know enough to say that between .1% to 20% is an unacceptably wide interval. Sure you can say that the majority of people download music, but the percentage can vary from 'almost everyone' to 'a significant majority'.

Besides, I'm more interested in WHY. Do they download it because they just don't want to pay? Or do they download because they want to sample with the intention of buying later? Or are they like you and think that their entitled to free entertainment.

It's a wide interval to be sure, I would also say that 80% of students of college age in my area is still close to everybody. Also, the majority said they did it for reasons of cost, with some saying the might buy something they enjoyed after downloading it.

By acknowledging that the situation you proposed was so ridiculously unlikely that someone with that kind of ability would have much better things to do than steal some guys book.

If someone took my book, copied it onto his ocmputer and started posting it online then I'd be pissed. You know why? Because now I'm being hurt. People are getting access to a service I'm providing for free, when I don't want them to have it for free. I'm taking a loss. Or someone is.

Then make a book worth paying full price for.

Stop playing semantics. You know what I mean. The radio station got a license to play the music legally. if you can get the same license, then bully for you.

However I doubt that.

Not that hard to get a small broadcasting station and a license to use it.

You yourself have said that the only way you'd stop pirating (breaking the law) is when they can stop you. I'm only applying your logic to other forms of crime.

Indeed.