...should be free

[bobwilson]

If someone sings a song, it should be free
If someone draws a picture it should be free
If someone cures a disease it should be free

Forgive me but, why?

If an artist spends years training and working hard, draws pictures, does he or she not have a right to make a living from his or her work? If we make everything free, how is he/she going to make a living?

I agree that many aspects of society & the 'establishment' are unjust, and I'm not advocating an opinion here but want to understand both sides a little better.

As for music, producers, singers and musicians spend their lives working on music for us to enjoy. Why should they not get paid for their hard work?

If someone chooses to work for free, shouldn't that be their choice?

As for a cure for disease, it's perhaps a little more contraversial, but have you considered the possibilities? What if a man gets a bank loan and spends a huge amount of money and time researching a cure for a disease. Why should we all benefit from his discoveries while he goes bankrupt unable to pay the loan back? Does he not at least deserve recognition and the ability to live a life (pay for his food and roof over his head). All he needs is to get paid for his hard work, like anyone else. Perhaps there are two sides to every coin.

Many of us are guilty of downloading on pirate bay or other sites, but I don't understand this idea that we are somehow noble or doing something right. If we're just sharing stuff people made and chose to be free to share, that's one thing, but we're sharing things that professionals developed and it's their livelihood. Just because we don't have the money to download music, does this make it right to steal it? Or should we maybe do a few more hours overtime to earn the things we want? I'm not advocating any particular opinion but could someone explain this concept to me that these things should be free and their creators live in poverty? We can't assume every creator is rich like Bill gates.

If the whole world worked for free, do you think society would funciton? I doubt many people would bother to create anything. Who would drive the trains, run the shops, make clothes or grow food? And what about software? What right do we have to decide whether a programmer who spent years studying & working, has a right to get paid for his work or not? What gives us the right to force him to starve unable to afford his bills or roof over his head, while we benefit from his work for free?

We all think of the big companies who hold monopolies, like Microsoft or Apple but what about the small to medium sized businesses or average men who have mortgage and bills to pay and need to feed themselves like everyone else- what gives us a right to take away their income for their hard work?

Again, I'm not advocating any opinion but would like to understand the logic behind this a little better.

[rumzak]

If someone sings a song, it should be free
If someone draws a picture it should be free
If someone cures a disease it should be free

Forgive me but, why?

If an artist spends years training and working hard, draws pictures, does he or she not have a right to make a living from his or her work? If we make everything free, how is he/she going to make a living?

I agree that many aspects of society & the 'establishment' are unjust, and I'm not advocating an opinion here but want to understand both sides a little better.

As for music, producers, singers and musicians spend their lives working on music for us to enjoy. Why should they not get paid for their hard work?

If someone chooses to work for free, shouldn't that be their choice?

As for a cure for disease, it's perhaps a little more contraversial, but have you considered the possibilities? What if a man gets a bank loan and spends a huge amount of money and time researching a cure for a disease. Why should we all benefit from his discoveries while he goes bankrupt unable to pay the loan back? Does he not at least deserve recognition and the ability to live a life (pay for his food and roof over his head). All he needs is to get paid for his hard work, like anyone else. Perhaps there are two sides to every coin.

Many of us are guilty of downloading on pirate bay or other sites, but I don't understand this idea that we are somehow noble or doing something right. If we're just sharing stuff people made and chose to be free to share, that's one thing, but we're sharing things that professionals developed and it's their livelihood. Just because we don't have the money to download music, does this make it right to steal it? Or should we maybe do a few more hours overtime to earn the things we want? I'm not advocating any particular opinion but could someone explain this concept to me that these things should be free and their creators live in poverty? We can't assume every creator is rich like Bill gates.

If the whole world worked for free, do you think society would funciton? I doubt many people would bother to create anything. Who would drive the trains, run the shops, make clothes or grow food? And what about software? What right do we have to decide whether a programmer who spent years studying & working, has a right to get paid for his work or not? What gives us the right to force him to starve unable to afford his bills or roof over his head, while we benefit from his work for free?

We all think of the big companies who hold monopolies, like Microsoft or Apple but what about the small to medium sized businesses or average men who have mortgage and bills to pay and need to feed themselves like everyone else- what gives us a right to take away their income for their hard work?

Again, I'm not advocating any opinion but would like to understand the logic behind this a little better.

The person you are replying to that says everything should be free is ignorant. If everything was free, no one would take the time to make the stuff in the first place. No one will do anything for free in this world, and i don't blame them. my personal opinion is that if a singer wants to make money by singing, they should do so by performing in person, selling tickets for shows, selling concessions, etc. but then after all that, their song that he/she sang will eventually be forgotten, so if we "Pirates" want to download the song for ourselves, i feel that it is ok. Now, when it comes to people who hack into company files and steal software (which i do not accuse anyone of) i do not agree with that. I feel that all things should be given a brief period where normal people can purchase the item for themselves, but, like i said before, should be free at the point where no one cares about the said item anymore. Like right now, i could go and download the newest operating system that might cost me hundreds of dollars at a retail store, but that is what drives these businesses to sue for copyright infringement, whereas if i had just download the previous OS, they really wouldn't give a damn. The reason why the pirate bay and other torrent sites get so much trouble from these different companies is because users of the sites are abusing the power given to them. Its all about greed.

[RobertX]

I don't think we share in astrel's opinion.

We'd like stuff that we can get and still afford it, but why do we have to do it so that we can pay into getting punished. These days, it's all about DRM. We can't put music in another computer without permission, we can't do what we pay it to do, and it's stuff that we paid for!

As far as downloading goes, I don't agree that we are doing something noble, but it is in the favour of the creators to get recognised. You're right, it's their perogative to get paid for their work. But we're not in the wrong for trying to educate, entertain, and edify ourselves by sampling a piece of work. And no, even though I said we're not being heroes for downloading copyrighted works, we are not thieves.

Thieves don't buy stuff that they like when they can afford it after a free sample? As well, thieves take credit for other people's works (Microsoft, I'm looking at you), so where do you find that happening here? Thieves... you get the idea.

Besides, I, for one, believe society can function if everything was free. It worked for GNU/Linux, it worked for the Free Software movement, and free stuff are already here right now! Have you heard of the free and open source office suite Libreoffice (http://www.libreoffice.org)? What about VLC (http://www.videolan.org), an audio/video media player that can play more audio/video formats out there. If you've been around the Internet long enough, you can very much see that there are a lot of free stuff. And oh a shameless plug: try Linux Mint (http://www.linuxmint.com ). The people who make them are less richer than Bill Gates, and do you know what's funny? When Gates dies, he will be known as a hero, a software giant, and a philantrophist (did I spell that correctly?). When Dennis Ritchie, the founder of UNIX, and subsequently the inspiration for GNU/Linux, died, nobody knew who the fuck he is, but none of us GNU/Linux fans will cry because that's life, and life is not fair.

http://www.arachnoid.com/careware/index.html

Paul Lutus, former NASA employee, computer programming hobbyist, and writer of the famous freeware multifunctional program Arachnophilia had a brilliant licencing scheme: Careware. Careware is so named because to "fulfill" the terms of the "licence," you just have to care. Care about whom? More about the people around you, and lesser about yourself. I know, I know, us pirates (and I am a proud pirate too! ) don't always take that Careware route, but I do try. This principle has all but strengthen my to live. I used to have a disdain about life, but I've been somwhat motivated a little and look at the world is it really is. No, I'm not trying to convert you, nor am I trying to impose idea. I'm just saying, we all need money, but the attitude of pricing a piece of work through the roof is not the way to deal with things. How far can it go until they learn?

Pirating out of spite of a company is not acceptable by my standards. I pirate because I know I need Windows. I like it! I use GNU/Linux for many things, but I also need Windows for the time being. I don't understand when people do that.

Now, a piece of advice: this thread is about Peter Sunde and his arrest, so I think we should stick to it, me included. Your arguments are worthy, but let's continue this in General Discussion before the mods get mad at us.

Thank you, and welcome to SuprBay.

EDIT: Just fixed the spelling of "thieves." Move along.

[bobwilson]

we are not thieves.

Thieves don't buy stuff that they like when they can afford it after a free sample?

But shouldn't it be up to the creator to decide whether he or she wants to hand out free samples of his or her hard work? If that power is in the masses, what guarantee is there that everyone will buy the stuff they like when they can afford it? After all, they've gained enjoyment before buying it, so there's no motivation to pay. If society relied on the moral compass of customers to pay, it's unlikely most shops (or creators) would make a living. I'm sure most of us have been guilty of downloading something online and using it without paying, then when we could have paid for it we ended up using that money for something else!

[RobertX]

You're right, bw, they do have that right.

They also have the right to run themselves out of business; but if they exercise it, they shouldn't blame the buyers for not making a profit if they are killing themselves without their "help."

You're right.

[bobwilson]

You're right, bw, they do have that right.

They also have the right to run themselves out of business; but if they exercise it, they shouldn't blame the buyers for not making a profit if they are killing themselves without their "help."

You're right.

So you agree, they do have that right? Ok.

If they go out of business because of their own mistakes, that's their problem. But that doesn't make stealing their products right, just because you speculate they might go out of business in the future (that's a sure fire way to make them go out of business!).

Can they blame us if they go out of business because we're pirating their products? Yes.

Not every creator is a Bill Gates or multi billionaire company, there are many small to medium sized creators who need to make a living.

[gcjm]

Can they blame us if they go out of business because we're pirating their products? Yes.

what tosh.

If you create something in a medium which the current market deems to be of a value equal to, or more than, that which you are requesting, you can expect your creation to be monetised.
If you expect to be monetised for a product which can be published and distributed for next to zero, you're too late, Henry the Eighth, your ship sailed last century.

All things belong to all people.
If you don't agree you're probably a capitalist pig / indoctrinated sheep / dinosaur.

[snilloc]

Can they blame us if they go out of business because we're pirating their products? Yes.

what tosh.

<snip>

All things belong to all people.
If you don't agree you're probably a capitalist pig / indoctrinated sheep / dinosaur.

I love the way you sit on the fence @gcjm

[stormium]

As for a cure for disease, it's perhaps a little more contraversial, but have you considered the possibilities? What if a man gets a bank loan and spends a huge amount of money and time researching a cure for a disease. Why should we all benefit from his discoveries while he goes bankrupt unable to pay the loan back? Does he not at least deserve recognition and the ability to live a life (pay for his food and roof over his head). All he needs is to get paid for his hard work, like anyone else. Perhaps there are two sides to every coin.

researchers and doctors receive grants and funding to research and find cures for diseases... usually after they make a proposal. a portion of that money is their salary.

but, when you look at the big pharmaceutical companies... and find out that they have a potential cure for ebola but decided it wasn't cost effective to continue development... do you really think they deserve anything other than our contempt?

true story. read about it here.

cures for diseases like aids, cancer, als... whatever aren't being driven by people seeking to improve the lives of those afflicted. the cure is being driven by profit and that's wrong.

We try never to forget that medicine is for the people. It is not for the profits. The profits follow, and if we have remembered that, they have never failed to appear. The better we have remembered it, the larger they have been.

in the case of music and movies... if you liked it, pay for it... that's what i do (physical copies only). also, in the case of digital downloads... nope... they can say i am only renting a license all they want and if that is truly the case then i'm not paying a full retail price... also, if they utilize drm and i'll pay even less... if at all. my money... my rules.

[RobertX]

http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-were-not-go...em-140911/

Not standing on either side except my own, but this article may be a positive way to fight piracy. Apparently, the MPAA is going around trying to teach kids about piracy and it's so, so, so, so, so fuggin bad about it.

I find this relevant because it may convince the newer generation that if they do become content makers, it might be beneficial to not do something right now that might be turnabout.

For me, I still wouldn't want to let the school to teach my kids and the duty that only parents can do better. In my opinion, successful or failure, I should let my children decide what they want for themselves.