Download Illegally? You're no better than the looters.

Toby Take a Bow

black francis wrote: »

Well, next time you meet him ask him how he would feel if someone uploaded his cd to a file-sharing website.
What if nobody bought any copies of the cd he's currently selling because all his 'fans' have previously illegally downloaded it?

As RichieC says above, Radiohead model will be the way forward. Now, people will say that using Radiohead as an example is unfair, as firstly, they only did it for one album and secondly they have a huge fanbase which can justify their 'experiment'. But other (smaller) artists are doing it. Jens Lekman encourages people to download his music (I've yet to buy an album of his, but I have seen him live, so have spent ten or fifteen euro on an artist I never would have, if I didn't have ready access to his music) and Kristin Hersh seems to be really behind it: her cash music project is a fairly complex but complete embrace of the download idea but with extras thrown in. Some bands won't be able to survive, but if you think about it, it may be going back to the pre-1950s era, when it was all about the live music.

joseph brand

jme2010 wrote: »

This was a debate I had with a co-worker.

I dissaprove of the rioting and looting, but I download illeaglly: songs, games, dvds, iphone apps etc.

He saw this as somewhat of a contradiction.

Are those who download illegally "criminals" as he put it? Or is it "not the same thing" as I put it.

Total grey area in my opinion.

Your co-worker is a tw*t!

jmayo

Alter-Ego wrote: »

Yeah, because putting a bin through the window of Carphone Warehouse window is exactly the same as downloading Phil Collins' Greatest Hits.

If it's a jury trial you are screwed either way.

d'Oracle wrote: »

Ever wonder what possessed someone to refer to it as piracy?

Feck it someone should tell Sony about all those Somalian pirates.

tfitzgerald wrote: »

I'm downloading a copy of the Koran at the moment if any wants me to burn them a copy let me know:)

So how is the weather like in Florida Reverend ?

Liam Byrne wrote: »

It's an interesting one, but the problem with that argument is that the car wouldn't exist.

Think about it.

A car company spends - say - €5,000,000 to create a particular car model.
They then sell ONE for €22,000
And you copy it, as does everyone else
...

I know a fair few people who reckon that is exactly what a certain large Asian country is doing.

This debate is a bit like the one on motors claiming speeders are attempted murderers or some such.

twinQuins

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Copy an existing one - yes.

Develop a new one - no.

So, as I said, no new or innovative cars being developed. We'd all be driving around in cloned Model Ts.

Unless of course someone (or some group of people) decided to develop a new car.

But of course, without monetary recompense humanity is doomed to a fate of utter stagnation...

Forest Master

Anyone who voted "it's the same thing" is clearly stupid and has no sense of logic, scale, context, common sense, or judgement.

Capt'n Midnight

Dun wrote: »

Piracy is not theft. As much as I'd love to download a new Galaxy S2, it's not possible.

just a matter of time really
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2010-11/02/printed-car

A prototype for an electric vehicle -- code named Urbee -- is the first to have its entire body built with a 3D printer.

Capt'n Midnight

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

piracy is theft, and all the moral hoops you all try to jump through to convince yourselves otherwise are just ridiculous.

Piracy is NOT theft.

Piracy is a very serious marine crime frequently associated with murder and violence, just look at what is happening in Somalia, in the Amazon or Indonesia. It's one of those crimes that any country can prosecute you for.


Theft is where you deprive someone of something they own. Generally speaking you can't be prosecuted for it if you move to a different state/country.

Copyright infringement is where you make a copy without the copyright owners permission before the copyright expires. The legalities vary by country. The copyright term in Japan for music was only 20 years not so long ago. In Ethiopia there was no copyright on software. Australia has a shorter term for copyright then we have so Gutenberg.au has lots of stuff you can't legally download.

If you have an album on one format ( VHS / Betamax / CD / Laserdisk / DVD / Cassette / Blueray / minidisk / MP3 ) then you are NOT allowed to make a copy (if you disagree please post a link form IMRO or statuebook.ie) so the act of ripping an album is illegal. Yes you paid for that plastic disk but you don't have the right to play it in public

Capt'n Midnight

yupyup7up wrote: »

What about if you download a movie illegally, but you actually already had the movie bought on DVD but lost it. Does this count? Also, what about Facebook stealing personal information?

you signed up for facebook , but have to agree with you on third parties being tagged

bnt

I dunno ... downloading media got old real quick for me, haven't done it in years. I just don't need a lot of stuff. My music collection doesn't have much newer than 1995 in it, but I like a few new independent bands: they aren't signed to any major labels, so I know that buying their music and going to their gigs supports them directly, not "big media" lawyers.

I have cable TV with HDD recording, so I'm not short of good movies to watch. Most new movies are crap and not worth the bandwidth, in my opinion: they never give me the feeling that I have to see them ASAP, so I have no urge to download a crappy copy. It irks me that my internet connection might be slowed down by kids downloading gigabytes of Transformers movies ... I can think of better use for that bandwidth.

Capt'n Midnight

black francis wrote: »

You do understand what 'copyright' is?
If the material you're 'copying' is 'copyrighted' then it is 'stealing'.

you've been brainwashed.ut

On the criminal side, certain acts in relation to the copyright work are characterised in copyright legislation as offences, for which penalties are prescribed. These offences include, not only the making of counterfeit works but also dealing in infringing works – by, for example, importing them, selling or renting them. Criminal penalties extend to fines of up to €127,000 and/or terms of imprisonment of up to 5 years.

Theft on the other hand is this
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2001/en/act/pub/0050/sec0004.html

LighterGuy

Mickeroo wrote: »

Copying is illegal yes, but is it theft? no. Nor is it breaking and entering or criminal damage. You wouldn't be tried for theft for downloading films you would be tried for copyright infringement afaik? so if that's the case they are different but both illegal.

But as you say, both illegal.
And thats one thing I hate about people when the discussion about downloading pops up.

You get dozens and dozens of people just spouting BS crap ... "oh its not theft as the law of theft states blah blah blah" or "its only copyright infringement its not stealing" blah blah blah :rolleyes: ... all just BS crap. Twisting or rationalizing it. While the simple fact is you obtained something illegally. You didnt pay for it.

Why on earth dont people just go "is downloading illegal? yes. Do I care or will stop? no." ... call a spade a spade. Do people honestly have to twist it so they feel more of a better person :rolleyes:

Mickeroo

LighterGuy wrote: »

But as you say, both illegal.
And thats one thing I hate about people when the discussion about downloading pops up.

You get dozens and dozens of people just spouting BS crap ... "oh its not theft as the law of theft states blah blah blah" or "its only copyright infringement its not stealing" blah blah blah :rolleyes: ... all just BS crap. Twisting or rationalizing it. While the simple fact is you obtained something illegally. You didnt pay for it.

Why on earth dont people just go "is downloading illegal? yes. Do I care or will stop? no." ... call a spade a spade. Do people honestly have to twist it so they feel a more of a better person :rolleyes:

I get what you're saying and I agree with you to an extent but it's not stealing, it's just completely innacurate to call it stealing. It's totally illegal regardless of course and I'd never deny that, but I'm never going to feel bad about doing it either, didn't feel bad when I used to tape films off the telly or tape songs off the radio either.

Liam Byrne

twinQuins wrote: »

Unless of course someone (or some group of people) decided to develop a new car.

But of course, without monetary recompense humanity is doomed to a fate of utter stagnation...

Not so much stagnation as death from exposure and starvation. People need wages.

Would love if they didn't fixate on silly money profits, though......society would be far, far better.

argosy2006

So if a friend of mine buys a CD, and plays it in my company i should block my ears coz i never paid for it, Or if he shares CD with me i should go pay store more money>?
SHARING IS GOOD,
WE WERE ALL THOUGHT THAT
IF SOMEONE WHO PAID BIG MONEY FOR A PIECE OF SOFTWARE WANTS TO SHARE, THEN SO BE IT!
Its not stealing, its sharing!!

Mickeroo

argosy2006 wrote: »

So if a friend of mine buys a CD, and plays it in my company i should block my ears coz i never paid for it, Or if he shares CD with me i should go pay store more money>?
SHARING IS GOOD,
WE WERE ALL THOUGHT THAT
IF SOMEONE WHO PAID BIG MONEY FOR A PIECE OF SOFTWARE WANTS TO SHARE, THEN SO BE IT!
Its not stealing, its sharing!!

Sharing is against copyright infringement laws.

Frank Black

argosy2006 wrote: »

So if a friend of mine buys a CD, and plays it in my company i should block my ears coz i never paid for it, Or if he shares CD with me i should go pay store more money>?
SHARING IS GOOD,
WE WERE ALL THOUGHT THAT
IF SOMEONE WHO PAID BIG MONEY FOR A PIECE OF SOFTWARE WANTS TO SHARE, THEN SO BE IT!
Its not stealing, its sharing!!

Seriously!

That's not what we're talking about here.

Mike 1972

TBH the poll could do with an "I never download (anymore) but dont have any problem with those who do"

LighterGuy wrote: »

Why on earth dont people just go "is downloading illegal? yes. Do I care or will stop? no." ... call a spade a spade. Do people honestly have to twist it so they feel more of a better person :rolleyes:

TBH unless there is a serious risk of being caught nobody really gives a damn whether any file sharing/downloading they may be engaged in is legal or not

A few (mostly misguided) people might have concerns over whether it is ethical but thats an entirely different matter.

Personally I almost never download/fileshare not because Im bothered about the legality of ethics of it but because
1) I already have more music than Im ever going to have time to listen to.
2) There is very little in the way of new music/films that Im particularly interested in and Im not into gaming.
3) A lot of the Software/warez floating around the net is either crap or riddled with trojans/viruses/spyware.

Yahew

argosy2006 wrote: »

So if a friend of mine buys a CD, and plays it in my company i should block my ears coz i never paid for it, Or if he shares CD with me i should go pay store more money>?
SHARING IS GOOD,
WE WERE ALL THOUGHT THAT
IF SOMEONE WHO PAID BIG MONEY FOR A PIECE OF SOFTWARE WANTS TO SHARE, THEN SO BE IT!
Its not stealing, its sharing!!

Listening is "fair use". Copying is illegal.

Capt'n Midnight

Yahew wrote: »

Listening is "fair use". Copying is illegal.

We don't have "fair use" here.

http://www.williamfry.ie/publication-article/incoming_government_promises_move_towards_us_style_fair_use_copyright_test.aspx

Currently, Irish copyright law operates for the benefit the content creators (i.e. authors, musicians etc). Intermediaries (i.e. YouTube, Eircom, UPC, Boards.ie, etc) and content users must rely on a number of limited exceptions (such as fair dealing and educational usage) when using copyrighted material (other than under licence) so as not to infringe the creator’s rights.

Yahew

Mike 1972 wrote: »

TBH the poll could do with an "I never download (anymore) but dont have any problem with those who do"

LighterGuy wrote: »

Why on earth dont people just go "is downloading illegal? yes. Do I care or will stop? no." ... call a spade a spade. Do people honestly have to twist it so they feel more of a better person :rolleyes:

TBH unless there is a serious risk of being caught nobody really gives a damn whether any file sharing/downloading they may be engaged in is legal or not

A few (mostly misguided) people might have concerns over whether it is ethical but thats an entirely different matter.

Personally I almost never download/fileshare not because Im bothered about the legality of ethics of it but because
1) I already have more music than Im ever going to have time to listen to.
2) There is very little in the way of new music/films that Im particularly interested in and Im not into gaming.
3) A lot of the Software/warez floating around the net is either crap or riddled with trojans/viruses/spyware.

That's not an ethical argument and it is not anything but a dull anecdote.

The hypocrisy is sickening here. Two people got about 100 thanks on page one for inane nonsense about leaving a copy of the software behind. Meanwhile a looter was jailed for stealing a bottle of water.

If a looter had stolen a DVD with Adobe CS on it , worth £1000+ she would have faced a very stiff sentence. More than someone who stole a blank DVD. The difference in price is the value of the software on the DVD. Yet according to page 1 it shouldn't matter because a copy of Adobe CS still exists.

That's not a legal or ethical.

Yahew

Mickeroo wrote: »

LighterGuy wrote: »

But as you say, both illegal.
And thats one thing I hate about people when the discussion about downloading pops up.

You get dozens and dozens of people just spouting BS crap ... "oh its not theft as the law of theft states blah blah blah" or "its only copyright infringement its not stealing" blah blah blah :rolleyes: ... all just BS crap. Twisting or rationalizing it. While the simple fact is you obtained something illegally. You didnt pay for it.

Why on earth dont people just go "is downloading illegal? yes. Do I care or will stop? no." ... call a spade a spade. Do people honestly have to twist it so they feel a more of a better person :rolleyes:

I get what you're saying and I agree with you to an extent but it's not stealing, it's just completely innacurate to call it stealing. It's totally illegal regardless of course and I'd never deny that, but I'm never going to feel bad about doing it either, didn't feel bad when I used to tape films off the telly or tape songs off the radio either.

In reality it is stealing. From the people who produced the items you are taking.

Mike 1972

Yahew wrote: »

If a looter had stolen a DVD with Adobe CS on it , worth £1000+ she would have faced a very stiff sentence. More than someone who stole a blank DVD. The difference in price is the value of the software on the DVD. Yet according to page 1 it shouldn't matter because a copy of Adobe CS still exists.

:rolleyes: If at this stage you STILL dont understand the difference between copying and stealing then I dont see much point in trying to help you any further .

And you can accuse people of "hypocrisy" all you like but there hardly a person in the country who has ever used a computer/video recorder/photocopier/audio recorder in a position to take the moral high ground when it comes to copyright infringement.

GOODNIGHT !

Mickeroo

Yahew wrote: »

In reality it is stealing. From the people who produced the items you are taking.

No in reality ie the eyes of the law, it's copyright infringement. In your opinion it's stealing.

Derek!

It's not stealin to me because anything I download I wouldn't have bought anyway.

iguana

bluewolf wrote: »

My no better?


Anyway it's more equivalent to going into the shops, making exact copies and leaving the originals undisturbed...

Or reading an article in a newspaper at the news stand but not buying it. It's not 100% right as you are benefiting from someone's work without remunerating them but you aren't taking it forever and stopping someone else from purchasing it.

Besides strange as it sounds, it does appear at present that items which are popular pirate downloads do better commercially as many people pay for the item after viewing it for free who would never have purchased it otherwise.

Yahew

Mickeroo wrote: »

Yahew wrote: »

In reality it is stealing. From the people who produced the items you are taking.

No in reality ie the eyes of the law, it's copyright infringement. In your opinion it's stealing.

It's clearly theft of someones product.

There is no difference between stealing the DVD with Adobe CS and downloading the software illegally. In both cases a "copy" exists. The only extra theft is the DVD but that price is insignificant. Illegal downloading also costs businesses money. Small businesses too, like indie devs.

Yahew

iguana wrote: »

bluewolf wrote: »

My no better?


Anyway it's more equivalent to going into the shops, making exact copies and leaving the originals undisturbed...

Or reading an article in a newspaper at the news stand but not buying it. It's not 100% right as you are benefiting from someone's work without remunerating them but you aren't taking it forever and stopping someone else from purchasing it.

Besides strange as it sounds, it does appear at present that items which are popular pirate downloads do better commercially as many people pay for the item after viewing it for free who would never have purchased it otherwise.

More likely "copying" the entire paper every day by taking pictures of every page, and going home to read it all. the shop would bar you relatively soon.

Mickeroo

Yahew wrote: »

It's clearly theft of someones product.

There is no difference between stealing the DVD with Adobe CS and downloading the software illegally. In both cases a "copy" exists. The only extra theft is the DVD but that price is insignificant. Illegal downloading also costs businesses money. Small businesses too, like indie devs.

There is a difference, if I download nobody knows I've got it, if I steal the CD someone will know it's gone. If I get caught downloading I'll get done for copyright infringement, if I get caught stealing the CD I get done for shoplifting/theft. The difference is clear.

Frank Black

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

you've been brainwashed

Naw, I just avoid trying to construct arguments to justify something I know is wrong but that I still do anyway. I'm morally conflicted about the whole issue tbh.
Anyone who tries to turn this into a linguistic argument about the legal definition of theft or stealing is missing the point.

What's the difference between looting a DVD from Tesco and downloading the same movie from the Internet?

Mickeroo

Yahew wrote: »

More likely "copying" the entire paper every day by taking pictures of every page, and going home to read it all. the shop would bar you relatively soon.

Bar you but not get you arrested for shoplifting.

black francis wrote: »

What's the difference between looting a DVD from Tesco and downloading the same movie from the Internet?

Tesco don't miss out.

Chuck Stone

Mena wrote: »

How is it grey? You're stealing it and that's the end of it.

Copper_pipe wrote: »

if you download illegally you are stealing IMO

Stealing what?

It's not a physical thing. The only reason it's illegal is because some people say so.

Why should someone who is not producing anything of value such as bread or milk be paid because they feel like they should?

Capt'n Midnight

iguana wrote: »

Besides strange as it sounds, it does appear at present that items which are popular pirate downloads do better commercially as many people pay for the item after viewing it for free who would never have purchased it otherwise.

cba looking it up bit IIRC MrGates is on record about software copying in china saying if they are going to copy stuff he'd rather it was microsofts. the competitiors can't compete with zero cost software and it creates a bigger eco system which the BSA can then rake in later on


for Music, bands break even with the record companies (dodgy pricing etc) and only profit from tours and merchantise

my belief on music is that people will spend a finite amount on it and if it's cheaper they will buy more albums and if more expensive they will buy less, the difference is that at the lower end of the scale people won't buy a single album if the price is too high.

IIRC it was on a BBC Radio 4 program that they said that the amound of GDP spend on lighting was something like 0.15% , and this figure is constant as far back as you can work these things out, certainly back to the bronze age and oil lamps. The reason we have more light nowadays is that it is cheaper rather than we want more of it. Perhaps the same could be true of music.

Frank Black

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Stealing what?

It's not a physical thing. The only reason it's illegal is because some people say so.

Why should someone who is not producing anything of value such as bread or milk be paid because they feel like they should?

Who decides what is of value or not?

Chuck Stone

black francis wrote: »

Who decides what is of value or not?

You tell me.

If I think something has value then I'll pay for it.

Frank Black

Chuck Stone wrote: »

You tell me.

If I think something has value then I'll pay for it.

Why download something if you feel it has no value?

Derek!

black francis wrote: »

Why download something if you feel it has no value?

Some people do this first to see if they feel it's worth paying for, then decide whether to buy or not.

Chuck Stone

black francis wrote: »

Why download something if you feel it has no value?

To see if it has value?

I recently downloaded an eBook and had a quick scan of it and thought 'hmmm this is good stuff' and bought the hard copy.

The diference between the harde copy and the download is that the download cost nothing but the book will cost the price of the manufacturing and distribution and it's tipping my hat to the work of the author.

Personally, I have grave reservations about some copyright laws. You have massive corporations (fictional entities) like Sony using tax payers money to enforce their view of the world which makes them very very rich.

Frank Black

Chuck Stone wrote: »

To see if it has value?

I recently downloaded an eBook and had a quick scan of it and thought 'hmmm this is good stuff' and bought the hard copy.

The difference between the harder copy and the download is that the download cost nothing but the book will cost the price of the manufacturing and distribution and it's tipping my hat to the work of the author.

Personally, I have grave reservations about some copyright laws. You have massive corporations (fictional entities) like Sony using tax payers money to enforce their view of the world which makes them very very rich.

So anything you download that you feel has any 'value' you purchase legally?
And anything you download that has 'no value' you don't purchase.
I doubt it.

I'm sure there's loads of stuff you watched, read or listened that you felt had some 'value' but weren't arsed to actually buy.

Chuck Stone

black francis wrote: »

So anything you download that you feel has any 'value' you purchase legally?

Yep 'legally'.

And anything you download that has 'no value' you don't purchase. I doubt it.

I actually don't download stuff unless it really interests me. I'm not one of those people who download stuff because they feel like they're getting away with something.

I'm sure there's loads of stuff you watched, read or listened that you felt had some 'value' but weren't arsed to actually buy.

Anything I have watched or listened to has been freely availiable on the web.

Granted I'm not really into movies or collecting albums so it's easier for me to avoid breaking their laws.

colinod0806

I download tv shows all the time but only because I cant wait to see them. And i almost always watch them when they're shown over here anyway so I can't see a problem with that.

On the other hand I download a lot of music and I have no way to justify this. I can't even blame the price because tbh even if it was a lot cheaper I think I would still probably download it.

I still don't feel bad about it though.

MungBean

Truth be told I rarely download torrents. So whats the opinion on streaming ? Is it morally wrong to to look at something someone else has done?. They put it up, made it available to see. Yes I choose to see it but I'm not taking it for myself. I dont have it available after I leave this other persons website.

Is possession the problem or is the problem solely with the fact that the movie belongs to Warner Bros and Warner Bros doesn't want me watching it without getting money so I am morally corrupt to do so ?

Frank Black

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Anything I have watched or listened to has been freely availiable on the web.

You're in the wrong thread so.

Frank Black

colinod0806 wrote: »

I download tv shows all the time but only because I cant wait to see them. And i almost always watch them when they're shown over here anyway so I can't see a problem with that.

On the other hand I download a lot of music and I have no way to justify this. I can't even blame the price because tbh even if it was a lot cheaper I think I would still probably download it.

I still don't feel bad about it though.

Exactly - it's the people trying to construct some sort of moral argument to justify it that annoys me.

Mickeroo

Skunkle wrote: »

Truth be told I rarely download torrents. So whats the opinion on streaming ? Is it morally wrong to to look at something someone else has done?. They put it up, made it available to see. Yes I choose to see it but I'm not taking it for myself. I dont have it available after I leave this other persons website.

Is possession the problem or is the problem solely with the fact that the movie belongs to Warner Bros and Warner Bros doesn't want me watching it without getting money so I am morally corrupt to do so ?

AS far as I know there's some kind of loophole in the law where it's illegal for a site to host the streams but it's not actually illegal for you to watch them. I'm not 100% sure but I seem to remember reading it somewhere.

Capt'n Midnight might be able to clarify?

Dave_Kilkenny

I can guarantee not one person who actively uses the internet has not committed 'copyright infringement'.
Lets give some examples!!
Watching a song on youtube, if its just uploaded by any person you are downloading it (Albeit not saving the file) you are still committing copyright infringement.

You see a cool picture on google, you save it, you use it as your background - it more than likely has been copyrighted by the artist - WHAM YOUR NOT A WORTHLESS THUG.

Other examples include me downloading an image of say spiderman printing it out, making a stencil out of the image and painting a room with the stencil - Think I got permission off Marvel - Hell no cause I'm actually a closet rioter who loves to smash small businesses up.

You make a video and use some of your favorite tunes in the background - Unless you've permission from the record labels - Oh know don't you dare.

Say you write a blog, today's post is about the London riots you use a picture you find on Google, do you've the photographers permission?

And yes I am aware that creative commons licensing exists but not everyone uses it.
The practice of downloading copied music is perfectly legal in many country's such as Canada, Spain and the Netherlands

Chuck Stone

black francis wrote: »

You're in the wrong thread so.

I have reservations about copyright laws so why shouldn't I be here?

A song is not a finite resource like say wheat or steel. It costs absolutely nothing (apart from the price of the electricity and internet minutes that you pay for yourself) to make a copy of song.

You tell me why people should pay for music or books?

Mike 1972

Dave_Kilkenny wrote: »

Watching a song on youtube, if its just uploaded by any person you are downloading it (Albeit not saving the file) you are still committing copyright infringement.

Actually because of the way web browsers (and computers generally) work its impossible to look at anything on the web without copying it.

First off it gets copied from the server to the "temporary" internet cache on your hard drive. Then it gets copied from Hard disc to RAM

Dave_Kilkenny

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Actually because of the way web browsers (and computers generally) work its impossible to look at anything on the web without copying it.

First off it gets copied from the server to the "temporary" internet cache on your hard drive. Then it gets copied from Hard disc to RAM

That was my point but I was simplifying it in terms of saying "Not actually saved"

GLaDOS_old

While i recognise that copying software is technically illegal I don't see anything morally wrong with it.
If the government licensed the air over ireland to a giant corporation tomorrow allowing them to charge a cent for every breath people take what would you do? Pay them their due because it is a legal requirement? Avoid breathing? or just decide that the law is uneforceable and against the best interests of society and ignore it?
Laws are implemented by society to make it a better place for all concerned but laws only work so long as society in general agrees with them and abides by them. Copyright laws and intellectual property laws were once a useful and important legal concept but they have now been overextended so much that they are out of touch with the reality of todays modern technology. just as a blanket 5mph speed limit would be almost universally ignored people dont feel bad about music piracy because it is exactly the same principle as lending a cd to a friend just on a larger scale.

Kepti

Us pirates are merely misunderstood environmentalists. Think of all it takes to produce, transport, store and sell hundreds of millions of books, games and DVDs.

If you buy your media in a store then you're backwards, filthy, coal-burning scum. You're desperately clinging to quaint but antiquated physical media, enriching already wealthy businessmen, at the expense of the planet.

And then you have the absolute gall to call us the criminals. Shame on you.