The Owl !KThEOwLwbU joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later[^][v]#74,861
maybe they only have low bandwidth caps
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 7 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,864
@previous (The Owl !KThEOwLwbU)
They do it for "moral reasons".
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 8 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,866
the majority of the people who do that are technically illiterate minority groups who can't afford the internet in the first place. but hey, if it gets them close enough to books, they may just start reading!
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 11 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,869
@OP
How do the libraries get the CDs? I'd bet they work out a contract with the record companies. Thus, the makers do get money.
totoforhire !!Phkn/3Gic joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 13 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,871
I like getting books from the library. I prefer them to reading things on a screen.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 16 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,881
@74,869 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU) > How do the libraries get the CDs?
They just buy them. > I'd bet they work out a contract with the record companies
No.
totoforhire !!Phkn/3Gic replied with this 15 years ago, 26 seconds later, 17 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,884
> Source?
Lrn2burdenofproof. > And even if they just buy the CDs, the makers of the CDs still get money from the purchase.
Original uploaders also have to buy a CD.
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 24 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,901
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 44 seconds later, 25 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,903
@74,888 (dreamwourks four mayour)
No, not if you lend it out one at a time.
A web site recently started up to exploit this, you can stream movies cheaply, and legally because they rent out a DVD player and a disc to stream it to you. They can only stream as many at a time as they have discs, though. source
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 26 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,905
@74,894 (A) > Lrn2burdenofproof.
I know my logic, thank you very much. You made a claim that libraries "just buy" CDs. I asked you to back up that claim. It's not my job to prove they don't "just buy" CDs; it's your job to prove that they do.
> Original uploaders also have to buy a CD.
Yes, but people who check CDs and DVDs out of the library don't permanently own the items they check out, unlike people who download songs illegally.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 48 seconds later, 27 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,906
@74,901 (The Owl !KThEOwLwbU)
No, not if you only rent out the item itself to one person at a time.
A service called Zediva does this by renitng out DVD players and discs, one at a time, and streaming it to the customer. read more here
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 30 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,911
> >Lrn2burdenofproof. > I know my logic, thank you very much. You made a claim that libraries "just buy" CDs. I asked you to back up that claim. It's not my job to prove they don't "just buy" CDs; it's your job to prove that they do.
First you made the claim that they need to pay royalties. Where is your source on that?
> Yes, but people who check CDs and DVDs out of the library don't permanently own the items they check out, unlike people who download songs illegally.
Many people who check out an item from the library, rip the music or movie, and then return the disc. Many people delete a pirated move right after watching it.
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU replied with this 15 years ago, 11 seconds later, 30 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,913
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 15 years ago, 12 seconds later, 38 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,922
@74,911 (A)
When did I ever say that? I said, and I quote, "I'd bet they work out a contract with the record companies". I never said "Libraries definitely work out a contract with record companies", and furthermore, I had never typed the word "royalties". If you want to know why I think they work out a contract, I'll gladly tell you, but I never claimed that they definitely did.
Even if you were right (which you are not), it still doesn't change the fact that you also made a claim that needs to be supported by some evidence, which you have conveniently still not provided.
> Many people who check out an item from the library, rip the music or movie, and then return the disc.
Is that legal? Are the people who do this also the people you are complaining about in your original post?
> Many people delete a pirated move right after watching it.
What percentage? So what?
The Owl !KThEOwLwbU replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 39 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,923
> When did I ever say that? I said, and I quote, "I'd bet they work out a contract with the record companies". I never said "Libraries definitely work out a contract with record companies"
All right. > Even if you were right (which you are not) Now I'd like to see your source. This is obviously a claim that need to be backed up. > it still doesn't change the fact that you also made a claim that needs to be supported by some evidence, which you have conveniently still not provided.
I rescind the claim, as it was meant to be a challenge to the first perceived claim (which we have clarified is not actually a claim) not a claim itself. Until otherwise proven, it should not be assumed that they arrange a deal with the owners of the intellectual property. Which only leaves us with what we know: They buy the CDs. If you think there is more to it (talking to the intellectual property owners about lending it out), that's up to you to prove. > >Many people who check out an item from the library, rip the music or movie, and then return the disc. > Is that legal? Are the people who do this also the people you are complaining about in your original post?
Yes. > >Many people delete a pirated move right after watching it. > What percentage? So what?
So they are doing the same thing as people who check out a movie and return it. They get it for free, and then after using it, lose it (either by returning, or deleting it).
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 48 minutes after the original post[^][v]#74,928
@74,923 (The Owl !KThEOwLwbU)
So if one service wants to rent out DVDs without contacting the owners of the intellectual property that's legal (see this, but someone else doing the exact same thing for free is not legal?
That's a pretty stupid bet.
(Edited 14 seconds later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 15 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#74,940
@74,927 (A) > >Even if you were right (which you are not) > Now I'd like to see your source. This is obviously a claim that need to be backed up.
Please, please be trolling. You agreed that you were wrong in the previous sentence when you said "All right". If you can't figure that much out on your own, then I really can't debate with you.
> Until otherwise proven, it should not be assumed that they arrange a deal with the owners of the intellectual property.
Why not? If we can't assume that they did arrange a deal, then we certainly can't also assume that they didn't make a deal, as that would be a claim requiring evidence just like the former.
> >Is that legal? Are the people who do this also the people you are complaining about in your original post? > Yes.
I asked 2 questions there, and got one answer. If the "yes" is an answer to the first question, I'd require a source. If it's to the second question, I'd like an answer to the first.
> > What percentage? So what? > So they are doing the same thing as people who check out a movie and return it. They get it for free, and then after using it, lose it (either by returning, or deleting it).
You dodged the first question, so I assume you rescind your claim that "many people delete a pirated movie right after watching it". Secondly, pirates acquired the movies illegally to begin with, so the analogy is flawed.
dreamwourks four mayour replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#74,954
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 29 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#74,955
@74,940 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Instead of being pedantic about every little thing, just show a fucking source. This "I bet" bullshit is just a pathetic way to avoid backing up your claim.
I've shown that people can rent out DVDs without negotiating (see: [http://torrentfreak.com/brand-new-streaming-movie-service-is-brilliant-ridiculous-110317/]. If you think it's different for libraries, you need a source.
(Edited 3 minutes later.)
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 24 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#74,956
@74,954 (dreamwourks four mayour)
Follow along: @74,916 (A)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#74,958
@74,955 (A)
That's not even close to being a good argument. "A private company (which I assume) has not negotiated anything with movie studios is allowed to stream movies to people. Even though this company is new and has not yet been challenged by the movie industry, it must be legal, and furthermore, since it is legal, public libraries never have to negotiate anything with any music labels ever."
There's a reason I'm being "pedantic": Your argument sucks, and I'm trying to get you to justify it.
(Edited 31 seconds later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#74,962
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Until you can actually provide evidence showing a library would have to pay royalties, or at the very least consult the intellectual property owners, (which should be very easy if true) I am going to assume you are a troll.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#74,966
@previous (A)
Until you can actually refute my argument or respond to my claims, I'm going to assume you are a troll.
See how this kind of rhetoric gets nowhere? Stop calling me names and start refuting the claims I made.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#74,967
> Until you can actually refute my argument
You didn't make an argument, you are trying to get out of providing proof by saying "I bet".
*ugh* feeding the troll here, inb4 this boils down to some solilipsism argument: >https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/First-sale_doctrine > The doctrine allows the purchaser to transfer (i.e., sell, lend or give away) a particular lawfully made copy of the copyrighted work without permission once it has been obtained.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#74,977
@previous (Born This Way !dLadyGAgAA)
Not quite. He linked to 2 different sections of the copyright law, and I didn't realize it until I had read too much of the wrong section. Not to mention I'm also reading something for school. It's going to take a little bit of time.
(Edited 28 seconds later.)
dreamwourks four mayour replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#74,980
@74,956 (A)
I was talking about the country I live in.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 27 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#74,981
Not sure why I pasted the wrong link before, still, you are completely wrong and I have given more than reliable enough sources.
So what's your next brilliant argument?
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#74,996
@74,967 (A) > You didn't make an argument, you are trying to get out of providing proof by saying "I bet".
I said "I bet" exactly one time in a claim I later retracted. Stop harping on it.
> *ugh* feeding the troll here, inb4 this boils down to some solilipsism argument: >https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/First-sale_doctrine > The doctrine allows the purchaser to transfer (i.e., sell, lend or give away) a particular lawfully made copy of the copyrighted work without permission once it has been obtained.
That's not really the relevant section, but fair enough. I was wrong to think that libraries paid royalties to record companies.
Born This Way !dLadyGAgAA replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#75,006
Do video rental stores pay royalties?
psychopath !PAHVpsycho joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#75,008
It's not illegal when the government does it!
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 19 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#75,040
psychopath !PAHVpsycho replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^][v]#75,586
Piracy should be legal as long as it is only used for non-profit and personal use.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#75,777
@previous (psychopath !PAHVpsycho)
What about sites like The Pirate Bay that make a profit helping people torrent, but aren't pirates themselves, and don't host any copyrighter material?
If simply helping someone pirate should be illegal, then what about utorrent?