IP Piracy

[just4kix]

There was a very thought provoking discussion about piracy, IP theft, legality, morality, etc. in the thread Sony launches a new Blu-ray player at Rs. 9,999/-.

No doubt those posts were offtopic in that thread but are still very important. Mostly I agree with the points raised by sanjay0864.

I cannot believe that educated members here think that ip piracy is not theft. How can possessing something for which you have not paid not equal to theft? What is theft then?

And I am not influenced by the arguments by MPAA, RIAA, and other who say that if you pirate, people who work for the product loose their income, etc. In my opinion, that is a lot of B***S*** (with a capital 'B', capital 'S'). The only people who make money from sale of video (let us stick to movies for the time being) are studio owners, distributors, manufacturers and sometimes the people they (studios) have agreed to share profits with (top actors, authors, top directors, etc.).

In my opinion, the studios have already recovered the money and most of the times made huge profits on box office ticket sales. DVD/BD sales are extra icing layers on the top. OK, some movies may not be hits or in some cases released straight to DVD/BD but such movies are not much pirated.

I sincerely believe that any justification to piracy is a hogwash. I support fair use, backup copying for personal use, lending, etc. But to say that "when I download a movie, I am not committing theft, crime, etc." ... I can't believe that people are even harbouring such thoughts never mind speaking them aloud.

There is no difference in theft of digital property or physical property. People are doing it because

• digital theft is so easy
• there is hardly any mechanism that will catch the culprits and so there is hardly a chance (one in a million) of getting caught
• there are plenty of places to hide

People would stolen physical property the same way if that was the case. Sanjay is perfectly right in equating IP theft to car theft as an example.

 

[Raghav]

Let me divide piracy of movies/songs into 2 domains:

1. Downloading stuff (where person sharing has a legal copy like a ripped song or movie from original CD/DVD) from the internet @ bandwidth cost.
2. Buying a duplicate DVD from the market at 1/3rd or 1/4th

1. First case, leta take the example of a community library. Say 200 members of a housing society come together and open a library of books, CDs and DVDs. All material is contributed by members and shared between themselves. Effectively one DVD/Book is being used by 100 members. This results in lost sales for producer of DVD/Book. This has existed for ages. The only difference is that now the concept has gone digital. People make a copy of a legal DVD/Book they own (They may have bought the Digital version itself) and share the same just like a community library. Only since the library is digital membership is now in thousands. Either both are thefts as volume of lost sales should not matter or both are acceptable.


2. In the second case, lets take the example of other duplicate goods. Duplicate of branded jeans, shirts etc.. sell in many markets at 1/4-1/10th the cost of original design. This kind of duplicity also exists in case of luggage, watches, sunglasses, belts etc. In plain words one who buys such stuff is buying a pirated (the design is stolen, brand name is stolen) piece. OK, the quality of material can be no match for the original, only deisgn and branding is the same. But then there are good quality fakes also. Similarly in DVDs quality of pirated DVDs are not the same quality as original. Varies from horrible to decent. In both cases you pay for the intrinsic cost and pirate the design/brand/IPR. Both are equally right or wrong.

I am not expressing views, just giving illustrations. This is to bring out more thoughts. Open to discussion.

 

[just4kix]

Good point (no 1). I had thought on similar lines - when libraries are legal then what is wrong with digital copying. But I have understood that libraries like BlockBuster, Netflix, etc. have to pay higher cost while purchasing DVDs. They also have to share a percentage the revenue with the owner/rights holder. I doubt whether such a practice exists in India.

Of course, this condition does not hold true for books and print media. This was probably because no one thought of or had the means to mass copy print media stuff years ago. So laws were not formulated then. And in any case, library membership really did not affect the book sales. Many buy books for personal collection, even today.

But yes, in case of printed media, the second case holds true. There are so many bookstall on the street lanes, footpaths that sell bootlegged stuff. This is definitely theft.

 

[captrajesh]

@OP : you have sensibly taken the topic out from the previous thread.:thumbsup:

PS: At the risk of sounding elitist, personally I would prefer the prices of Blu-ray players and software to remain substantially higher than DVDs. For, this seems to be the only way to keep the 'average joe' from totally destroying this format, by accepting pathetic quality, forced advertising, watermarks etc. from companies such as MoserBaer, Shemaroo & T-Series. We all know once the 'average joe' gets in on the act, these companies would no longer care two hoots of what a few of us think or do. Please remember, that in India, with every single new video format, the quality has only gone from bad to worse and never the other way around.

I just do not understand this statement at all. Who is this average joe and how does he destroy the bd format.

How an earth does keeping the cost high would facilitate keeping at bay the forced advt watermarks? (which you apparently despise)

Keeping the format just the way it now is and keeping the costs high, how much revenue doe you think the maker would make?

With due apologies, you must acquire some more insight into the marketing strategies and business models of these companies before forming your opinion and posting it. No offenses meant please.

 

[just4kix]

I, too, do not subscribe to the views that BD player/disc prices should be kept (artificially) high. That is not going to serve anyone. This is not only being elitist but also being bourgeois/feudal. "Hey, watch out, you neder folks! We are a class apart!"

As regards to watermarks, these are obviously a mood damper but Indian DVDs are not copy protected by Macrovision, CSS, etc. So they use the watermark. I do not have a stock of Moser Baer DVDs - just a few of them (about 12). But I have not seen a single advert in any one of them.

As regards to PQ of MB DVDs, I have mostly collected golden oldies like Chalti ka Naam Gaadi, Padosan, Jaane Bhi Do Yaaron, etc. These are certainly not remastered copies and hence nags in the originals have been inherited. The MD DVD of MunnaBhai MBBS is not at all bad, in fact quite good. At least I could not find any fault with the DVD (save the watermark) and I am comparing this with any standard Hollywood DVDs. I have seen the DVD on home projector using non-upscaling DVD player. I don't know - maybe I am missing something.

I think, people should appreciate what MB has done. It has forced slashing of obscene prices and helped to combat piracy to some extent. At least people can no longer have the excuse, "I purchased bootleg because I could not afford ...".

 

[psychotropic]

What I fail to understand is that the hysterical piracy crusaders seem to believe that saying "piracy is not the same as theft" is somehow a justification of piracy.

If I say that murder is not the same as rape, does that mean I am justifying murder? No I am just stating facts, facts that anyone who cared to think about them would have understood.

There is a simple difference. Theft removes the original. Piracy makes a copy. Show me one instance of conviction for an offence of theft anywhere in the world, where the item in question has not been removed. (There is of course a more complex examination of the difference between corporeal property and so-called 'intellectual property' but i am trying the simpler approach for now)

The reason why the poorly informed public are quick to equate piracy and theft is that they feel outrage about piracy (which may be justified), and they believe that to convey the outrageousness of piracy they need to equate it to something that people already think is outrageous, ergo theft!

Piracy is illegal. Piracy is a civil as well as a criminal offence. Piracy is not theft. Murder is not rape.

 

[ajinkya]

Psychotropic,

I think I understand your point of view and that of just4kix as well. It is a classic case of context mismatch, I believe. You are looking at the legal definition of the term - what is the word we put in the legal document/chargesheet when we want to prosecute someone of piracy?
Just4kix (and sanjay) are looking at the common sense/moral meaning of the term.

You are right -murder is not rape. Not legally. And there is no death sentence for rape (as far as I know). However, any unfortunate woman who has been through this horrendous experience has a right to argue that morally, rape amounts to murder - of one's self-respect, freedom, self-worth, feeling of secureness...even one's future life and prospects. In a particularly gruesome rape incident (minors, gang-rape, rape in front of family), one may even argue that the rapist be hanged.

That feature may not be provided in our laws. But morally, for society, such an individual is no different from a murderer. Taking a life, or destroying one forever in such animalistic circumstances, may amount to the same amount of 'moral punishment' in the eyes of many societies. I think this is the difference between how you are looking at the issue and how the other two posters are.

I also believe that the reason existing piracy laws were extensively changed because of the ephemeral nature of the digital world, where 'physical' has no meaning, since perfect copies can be made without affecting the original. So, it is not theft, if the legal definition is that some physical object is taken away. However, it certainly means potential lost revenue for the creator, and free, illegal viewing/benefits to the person indulging in it. Which point, I believe you've addressed and agree with as well. I am curious what 'corporeal property' is and why it is so different legally? I don't want to go off-topic, unless it brings more insight into the original thread question.

 

[just4kix]

@ psychotropic,
Correct me, if I am wrong. You are saying that you are not justifying piracy. So I am bit nonplussed at what your argument is all about? Is it that you are saying that it is not theft in the classical sense?

If you look at definition of theft - removal of property with the intention of permanent deprivation of possession of the concerned items from the owner - then IP theft is not theft in a that sense. But you must consider/treat IP differently.

And just because there is no conviction, does that mean it is not a crime? Besides you are quite wrong here - there have been plenty of convictions in crimes related to content copying, IP theft, etc.

Leave aside MPAA, RIAA, studios, etc. But here the copying of content is depriving someone of their right to earn money out of legitimate sales. The copier is in possession of digital property that is not paid for. This is theft. I am not supporter of the Hollywood studios - I think my feeling and opinions are amply clear in my first post.

 

[asliarun]

Psychotropic,

I think I understand your point of view and that of just4kix as well. It is a classic case of context mismatch, I believe. You are looking at the legal definition of the term - what is the word we put in the legal document/chargesheet when we want to prosecute someone of piracy?
Just4kix (and sanjay) are looking at the common sense/moral meaning of the term.

You are right -murder is not rape. Not legally. And there is no death sentence for rape (as far as I know). However, any unfortunate woman who has been through this horrendous experience has a right to argue that morally, rape amounts to murder - of one's self-respect, freedom, self-worth, feeling of secureness...even one's future life and prospects. In a particularly gruesome rape incident (minors, gang-rape, rape in front of family), one may even argue that the rapist be hanged.

That feature may not be provided in our laws. But morally, for society, such an individual is no different from a murderer. Taking a life, or destroying one forever in such animalistic circumstances, may amount to the same amount of 'moral punishment' in the eyes of many societies. I think this is the difference between how you are looking at the issue and how the other two posters are.

I also believe that the reason existing piracy laws were extensively changed because of the ephemeral nature of the digital world, where 'physical' has no meaning, since perfect copies can be made without affecting the original. So, it is not theft, if the legal definition is that some physical object is taken away. However, it certainly means potential lost revenue for the creator, and free, illegal viewing/benefits to the person indulging in it. Which point, I believe you've addressed and agree with as well. I am curious what 'corporeal property' is and why it is so different legally? I don't want to go off-topic, unless it brings more insight into the original thread question.

If downloading a digital copy of a song or a movie is morally considered to be the same as stealing a car, as has been suggested by several people in this thread, should the punishment be the same??

Should any of you get imprisoned for 5 years because you did not return your library book?

Just asking.

Calling this "piracy" itself shows the double standards being propogated by the media companies and their lobbyists and crony politicians. A modern day pirate wields an AK47, jumps into a ship, kills the crew or takes them hostage, and loots the ship. If downloading a song is this severe a crime, god save us all, we all deserve to be hanged.

Just to be clear, I am not saying that illegal downloads are good, morally or otherwise. However, one has to put it in the right perspective, especially when the media companies and politicians are much much more morally corrupt. Very often, when you see immorality rampant and commonplace, it is because people are reacting to something so large and systemic that the only way they can "wrest back" some semblance of fairness and justice is to go illegal (as defined by law). We need to understand and cure the root cause and not just the symptom.

By the way, Microsoft has probably been at the receiving end of this problem for many decades, and probably more than all the media companies combined. Yet, Bill Gates managed to become the richest man in the world, mainly because Microsoft understood this a lot better and incorporated this into their marketing strategy.

 

[alcy]

What I fail to understand is that the hysterical piracy crusaders seem to believe that saying "piracy is not the same as theft" is somehow a justification of piracy.

If I say that murder is not the same as rape, does that mean I am justifying murder? No I am just stating facts, facts that anyone who cared to think about them would have understood.

There is a simple difference. Theft removes the original. Piracy makes a copy. Show me one instance of conviction for an offence of theft anywhere in the world, where the item in question has not been removed. (There is of course a more complex examination of the difference between corporeal property and so-called 'intellectual property' but i am trying the simpler approach for now)

The reason why the poorly informed public are quick to equate piracy and theft is that they feel outrage about piracy (which may be justified), and they believe that to convey the outrageousness of piracy they need to equate it to something that people already think is outrageous, ergo theft!

Piracy is illegal. Piracy is a civil as well as a criminal offence. Piracy is not theft. Murder is not rape.

Things can't be explained better than this.

 

[Hiten]

Guys,
Why argue on definition of Piracy and Theft, Piracy is nothing but Theft of Intellectual Property. :lol:
Peace


How to stop Piracy : Start listening to vinyl. It can't be copied

 

[psychotropic]

ajinkya,

There is no context mismatch. What you speak of is the outrage that I spoke about. And once outraged, people want to equate the cause of this outrage with something that is commonly considered outrageous. Your example of murder and rape is a perfect example of this kind of falsehood. You are upset, you are outraged, and so you think that the person should be hanged, and therefore, in your head rape equals murder.

But that doesn't change facts. Does it? Does it make rape murder? yes rape is an awful thing. But rape is not murder.

Let me illustrate how your example doesn't quite work. A movie is a great source of entertainment and enlightenment. A movie has characters, plot, contexts, conversation, conflict, action, resolution,..so then it must surely be a book!

I hope you get what I am trying to say! I am not commenting on morality. I am not commenting on the rights and wrongs of piracy. Piracy is illegal. Piracy is a specific offence. There are many offences in the world. But they're not all theft!

I do appreciate the likes of just4kix and sanjay crusading against piracy. It is great to see people passionate about what they believe is a social ill, and speaking out against it. But when they equivocate. When they fudge the facts for greater impact, their message loses its meaning and its credibility. For the sake of the cause that they believe in, and that they consider it worth fighting for, I would urge them to not to play fast and loose with the facts.

Psychotropic,

I think I understand your point of view and that of just4kix as well. It is a classic case of context mismatch, I believe. You are looking at the legal definition of the term - what is the word we put in the legal document/chargesheet when we want to prosecute someone of piracy?
Just4kix (and sanjay) are looking at the common sense/moral meaning of the term.

You are right -murder is not rape. Not legally. And there is no death sentence for rape (as far as I know). However, any unfortunate woman who has been through this horrendous experience has a right to argue that morally, rape amounts to murder - of one's self-respect, freedom, self-worth, feeling of secureness...even one's future life and prospects. In a particularly gruesome rape incident (minors, gang-rape, rape in front of family), one may even argue that the rapist be hanged.

That feature may not be provided in our laws. But morally, for society, such an individual is no different from a murderer. Taking a life, or destroying one forever in such animalistic circumstances, may amount to the same amount of 'moral punishment' in the eyes of many societies. I think this is the difference between how you are looking at the issue and how the other two posters are.

I also believe that the reason existing piracy laws were extensively changed because of the ephemeral nature of the digital world, where 'physical' has no meaning, since perfect copies can be made without affecting the original. So, it is not theft, if the legal definition is that some physical object is taken away. However, it certainly means potential lost revenue for the creator, and free, illegal viewing/benefits to the person indulging in it. Which point, I believe you've addressed and agree with as well. I am curious what 'corporeal property' is and why it is so different legally? I don't want to go off-topic, unless it brings more insight into the original thread question.

 

[suri]

i want to say something here that will carry this conversation further -

and so i will -

to the pirate - "Say, bro - that black eye-patch don cut no ice man - get an eye-patch in purple - butt-plugger!

and to the thief - " Say, bro - west-side is the best, you try and come here - i cut you up man, i cut up yo sistah, your sorry brothah is hissturry- i kill you man.

and

generally -

it is the women of the world -

who think of all the less important things - such as -

the food for the day (for the family) - and the "together times" for the family- and hosting "get-togethers" for friends and family - and "quality time".

and the men? (like us)

we debate and hold court on much more important things-

such as -

the EVIL OF PIRACY OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PIRACY

and

HOW " I COULD CHANGE THE FACE OF INDIAN POLITICS"

and

"THE MISTAKES THE SELECTORS MADE FOR THE WORLD CUP TEAM"

(of course, this keeps the men occupied, and less inclined to destructive outlets for the male hormone!)

women are from earth -

and men are from mars

excusez moi - psychotropic - for thirty five seconds before the next post

@ ajinkya - the law may be an ass - but it is exact in it's reach (depending on those clever minds who interpret it)

 

[suri]

And there is no death sentence for rape (as far as I know).

the definition of rape is exact - and the jury/judge in different parts of the world may award the sentence of death -

Death penalty in rape case upheld - NOLA.com

and, (legally)

there is an exact definition (and scope) for every violation of societal law - that definition is precise - and does not allow latitude for overlap with another offence

 

[goyal.sanchit]

1.) I somewhat agree with the point made here earlier that if sharing on internet is wrong then public libraries are also wrong as both affect the sale of the original items.


2.) I wouldnt say that "Piracy is not wrong". But I would have to say that I wont feel guilty if I download a big blockbuster movie or something like that.

Inspite of so much piracy these companies do make good amount of profits and dont go in losses. Now I dont care about how much the other person is earning but it proves the fact that they charge way above the cost so that they are able to still make profits.

Now companies have come with their DVD's @ around 40 Rs. to combat piracy and IMO it will have a positive impact.

If the products are available at reasonable prices IMO more people will buy the original.

 

[vinay]

If piracy is theft then will a doctor be in-direct murderer because there are many cases where they are not attending to critical patients with due care resulting in some deaths.

If the law and order is not okay and if there are many murders every know and then so are politicians, cops etc are in-direct murderers?

There will be advocates available at the drop of a hat to shield the murderer's, so are advocates in-direct murderer's?

There are media players like wdtv etc, most of them who buy these gadgets because they want to watch the downloaded movies so are media player companies in-direct thieves?.

The point i am trying to make is that in most walks of life something is wrong so similarly piracy is also wrong which is being done on a large scale all over the world.

V.

 

[vramak]

i want to say something here that will carry this conversation further -

and so i will -

to the pirate - "Say, bro - that black eye-patch don cut no ice man - get an eye-patch in purple - butt-plugger!

and to the thief - " Say, bro - west-side is the best, you try and come here - i cut you up man, i cut up yo sistah, your sorry brothah is hissturry- i kill you man.

and

generally -

it is the women of the world -

who think of all the less important things - such as -

the food for the day (for the family) - and the "together times" for the family- and hosting "get-togethers" for friends and family - and "quality time".

and the men? (like us)

we debate and hold court on much more important things-

such as -

the EVIL OF PIRACY OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PIRACY

and

HOW " I COULD CHANGE THE FACE OF INDIAN POLITICS"

and

"THE MISTAKES THE SELECTORS MADE FOR THE WORLD CUP TEAM"

(of course, this keeps the men occupied, and less inclined to destructive outlets for the male hormone!)

women are from earth -

and men are from mars

excusez moi - psychotropic - for thirty five seconds before the next post

@ ajinkya - the law may be an ass - but it is exact in it's reach (depending on those clever minds who interpret it)

I read thro this post thrice and I still have no idea what you're talking about. It may be because I'm drunk now. Also, it maybe because you were drunk when you posted this. 2nd is likely the case coz I think better when I'm drunk. (See how intelligible my post is!).

 

[svenkateshsmart]

Hi,

Actually, the act of stealing or theft removes the "original" from the possessor or owner of the property, whereas piracy is the act of "copying" or "duplicating" the content which remains the property of the owner even after the act or omission and thereby causing pecuniary damage to the owner. Also, theft involves dishonest intention and intention plays the main role in the act of stealing.

There is no doubt that the act of piracy is wrong per se, but I second goyal's view.

I feel that they can reduce this by bringing the cost of DVD, CDs, BDs less so that everyone can easily afford it, as Goyal mentioned in his post. Of late, a handful of people wait for the movies to be released on the regional channelhyeah:.

I still wonder why actors have to be paid 30 and 40 crores and they should transfer the burden onto us:sad:

Cheers!

 

[vinay]

There will be so many members who are downloading movies but i think there will be a rare case where someone is downloading to sell them, this way at least we are much lesser guilty. I know of a member who has just too many movies and i remember he telling me that he has never sold movies, it has been for his personal use and maybe to share with some of his contacts.

There are unlimited downloads available from Internet companies so would these service providers be in-direct thieves keeping in mind the subscribers who have taken such unlimited packages with higher speed is mainly for downloading movies?

I think this downloading should be regularized so one pays a small fee.

V.

 

[suri]

I read thro this post thrice and I still have no idea what you're talking about. It may be because I'm drunk now. Also, it maybe because you were drunk when you posted this. 2nd is likely the case coz I think better when I'm drunk. (See how intelligible my post is!).

hehehe!!! -vramak-

but read the first line -

and see-

that, i have carried the conversation further!