fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2330 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2330 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 068 secrets from Secret Submission Post #333.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Don't blame me because you feel guilty for stealing.

Stop projecting.

How can I feel guilty for something that's not even wrong in the first place?

If you don't think stealing is wrong, you're either a sociopath, or not old enough to be on the internet without your mother's permission.

Stealing is wrong. Replicating information isn't.

Replicating information without permission is stealing. And it's wrong. Maybe not to the magnitude other things are wrong. But as an artist I can tell you it's wrong.

Replicating something without permission is counterfeiting. Criminal, but not theft.

You realize it only became "wrong" with the dawn of the internet, and no-one really batted an eyelash? about it before? People borrowed/copied cassettes or CD's all the time, or even tapes songs from the radio. Also: taping films on video recorders. Yeah, I'm old. But my point is this was never considered theft, it was normal social behavior until companies figured out that "sharing" really goes fast on the internet, and they started worrying about losing money.

But you know, the whole idea of copyright is relatively new. For a lot of history, it was perfectly normal to build on, or make different versions of another person's musical composition, for example. Copyright as we know it now has existed for less than & 100 years (and even not even in every country, it's very much tied to capitalism), and I think the system upheld now is not sustainable. Somehow I think creators/distributors will have to end up finding others ways to fund this/make money than to crack down on the sharing of media, which has always existed.

Actually when VHS and audio tapes were introduced there was a very similar kerfuffle about how they were going to destroy the music and movie industries at the time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GftfKCTiJ3A

Shockingly both of those industries still exist today, who woulda thought?

Those were rentals and/or purchased films, though - I remember those warnings. But I do not remember fuss over tapping TV shows, but maybe I missed that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Universal_City_Studios,_Inc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Rogers#VCR

Thank you, that was interesting!

Fred Rogers? As in Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood Fred Rogers?

Seriously?

Late reaction is late (to be fair there were a LOT of comments to go through).

The very same!

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2013-05-21 06:20 (UTC) - Expand

Mr. Rogers, as always, rocks.

Ah yeah, yo're right. I did a research project on piracy and I found a bunch of sources about that, lemme see what I can find...

UK campaign against home-taping
Don't Copy that Floppy
film piracy existed in the 1910s
MPAA head says "VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone."
searching the history of music piracy also brings up a lot of articles too.

Edited 2013-05-21 01:41 (UTC)

OMG! don't copy that floppy - man, that's a blast from the past.

NA Yeah, no, it didn't become "wrong" with the dawn of the internet. It's always been illegal. People did get prosecuted for videotaping movies in cinemas and selling copies of that--it's theft. Yes, doing it in your home was theft and illegal--if you wanted a copy, you should have bought it. No, music companies weren't happy about people taping songs off the air--they just couldn't figure out how to prosecute them; they also accepted that if people really wanted a decent copy of the song w/o room noise, etc., they'd have to buy a copy of the tape/record. Also, taping something and passing it around your friends was illegal, but it was much harder for the companies to find out and prosecute--it's much easier these days b/c of the Internet to find out and prosecute.

Actually that really depends on local law. Here having home copies and sharing with direct family/friends was not illegal. Yes, videotaping in a cinema was illegal, but not, say, making a music mix for your buddy, because that counted as "family circle use". I realize the logic was: if they want decent quality, they'll just have to buy it, and that point is now moot. But very little actually chanced except for technology and availability, but as always, people are trying to artificially fight that change.

As I recall, at least in my locality, a compromise was reached whereby copying for personal, non-commercial use was allowed and a small surcharge on blank media went to the content creators. The majority of the public was happy with this arrangement, and I don't see why a variation thereof couldn't be employed today (except of course that it would deprive the MPAA/RIAA of the dictatorial control they've always wanted.)

Holy fuck, stop.

Stop throwing words around, you stupid, silly anon.

For fuck's sake don't compare someone who wants to watch an episode of TV to a sociopath.

But how else will they get their dose of Holier-Than-Thou for the day?

/wipes tear from my eye

I just...I don't know anon! I don't know.

But maybe they're watching Hannibal and identify themselves with him!

Got to love the self-proclaimed defenders of the moral high ground using mental illness as a cheap insult, right?