I think downloading music and movies illegally is wrong, though I could be called a hypocrite(sp?) since some of the music that I have on my iPod has not been paid for (but then again it's stuff that I can't buy from itunes in the first place and am forced to download if I want to hear it). Movies is one thing I really don't understand why people don't go to the theater to see. I mean I would rather see a movie at a theater than on my tiny a$$ computer monitor.

Anime is different in my opinion since I would love to buy the DVDs of the shows that I am watching now but it just so happens that I cannot since they aren't made available to me (plus there is the fact that the greater majority of fansubbers do it with no pay).

Manga is the same way as anime in my opinion, but there are some other reasons why I dl some of them if they are already licensed. The main reason is editing, I remember picking up the first volume of Tenjo Tenge at my local Borders and reading it. After reading it I went and looked for scans of it online and found out how much the publisher here in the states edited the content to get a teen rating. Needless to say I didn't buy anymore copies.

[color=green]BELIEVE[/color]

I download cause I don't and can't pay (the worst kind). And I have this OCD thing and when I download, I download the biggest and best quality files. Such as 8GB movies and 20MB songs in FLAC. 😀

So tell me the difference between reading books at your local library... and then if you do like the book or the author, you start buying his or her stuff because sometimes it won't be available in the library.

I mean, of course, downloading the manga isn't regulated by the government, but look, it's a free library source, isn't it? The government doesn't need to spend money to keep people happy and entertained.

Now, libraries are buying CDs to let people borrow. Now, what's the diff there if I wanted to hear some tune? The internet's just a bigger place to get the stuff you enjoy.

The RIAA doesn't complain about the libraries because it still gets a bit of money for the library purchasing those. So, it looks like the only way to make the RIAA happy is to just blatantly pay them money to allow downloading to go on.

Plus, the artists do not make that much money off selling CDs. It's more about a gauge to see how popular they are. But, now the internet's a better source for that.

I do make reasons to justify what I'm doing, because I believe that we can think for ourselves. We're the customers... and if the RIAA drives us away like that, then they LOSE their business. I've almost stopped listening to American artists now... and mostly listen to Asian music. It's all the same in my book. I get my entertainment, and I don't get harassed by the RIAA. It shows that I can do without english music if forced. I'll just find some other form of entertainment. 😛

So, therefore, it's still illegal, but more justified in my view because the RIAA isn't really changing according to the times. It can be considered having a monopoly on the CDs... and as we all know, monopolies are bad. 😛

-Max

hmm, if downloading anime or is illegal only if its licenced in my country, than i dont have any of those problems, cuz i am yet to find a manga lisenced in israel, and most of the anime series we get from "anime channel" are dorky...

but im sure that the downloading is the illegal act. when its licenced no one is allowed to "copy" right? the person downloading is not copyng anything from the original, they copy from a copy which is not made by them, right? 😕

the best security guard, EVER.

Quote from moritana

but im sure that the downloading is the illegal act. when its licenced no one is allowed to "copy" right? the person downloading is not copyng anything from the original, they copy from a copy which is not made by them, right? 😕

a copy of a copy a copy a copy 🤣

Thats just the thing, downloading is just someone giving you a "copy" of the material.

If I took a picture of the famous painting Mona Lisa, would that be considered a copyright violation?

[color=green]Life, what would it be without so much wrongs and rights?
[/color]

[color=red]Star Trek XI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZiR-NETDr0[/color]

Quote from ares6

If I took a picture of the famous painting Mona Lisa, would that be considered a copyright violation?

Are you even allowed to take photos in the first place at that French Museum (can't spell it off the top of my head)?

[color=green]BELIEVE[/color]

Quote from ares6

If I took a picture of the famous painting Mona Lisa, would that be considered a copyright violation?

I believe after a certain number of years without renewal, things become public domain. I saw this in a note on Wikipedia concerning conjoined twins and the person who had added that if the photo had been taken more recently than allowed without violating copyright, to delete it. There are photos of old paintings on Wikipedia.

[color=#990066]My avatar was Yves Saint Laurent's The Black Evening Dress (with big bow) first shown in 1983, photographed from his 2002 retrospective and final show.[/color] [color=#CC0066]Check out some of his collections for free (pre-2008) HERE[/color] [color=#CC0066]courtesy of FirstView[/color].

The title should give this everyones answer.

Illegal is Illegal. However, that doesn't mean people won't do it.

I have MP3s. However, alot of them I own the actual albums of.

Welcome to Manga-Updates!
If you're new, please read the rules.
If you're returning, please follow them.

I believe in supporting the artists I like. Which means that I buy their work -- even if I own mp3s, I buy the CDs first and then transfer the music onto my computer (and then onto my iPod).

Not everything that's illegal is wrong -- I mean, there are places that ban sodomy, but I quite enjoy sodomy myself! However, in this case, I think it's a good thing that pirating music is illegal. It protects artists who work hard to produce their art. They deserve to get paid for it.

And I know that many people will call me a hypocrite, esp. when I say that "not everything that's illegal is wrong" -- but hey, I don't think there's a single person out there that doesn't disagree with SOME law. There are countries where the laws are biased against women, for example, or against free speech. shrug So it's up to us to choose which laws we obey, wherever we are.

Because of that, I can understand why other people might have different opinions about music/movie piracy, and might agree with it or even think it morally correct.

I, however, do not. Illegal downloading is tantamount to theft. At least in my books. 🙂

"They sicken of the calm, who knew the storm." - Dorothy Parker.

Quote from DeLtA_IjK

So tell me the difference between reading books at your local library... and then if you do like the book or the author, you start buying his or her stuff because sometimes it won't be available in the library.

I really, really like your argument -- I think it probably shows us how things will be in the future, and how the Internet might operate once bureaucrates get their heads out of their asses.

BUT, your argument only works as long as the artists still get paid for their work. I mean, a book in a library was purchased by the library, and money still went to the author. In a way, the fact that the book's in a library is an effort on the behalf of the author's publisher to boost sales -- that is, to get more people to be aware of the author. It isn't a charity, because the publisher (and hence the author) does end up making money from it. Also, a library book ends up getting returned, whereas music, once downloaded and possessed by someone, cannot be returned to be "loaned" out again. How many people can promise to delete their files after downloading them? Not many. Unless the files that are downloaded are somehow timed to self-destruct, there is no way to restrict their distribution.

I have no qualms about LEGAL downloading, if a company/government/someone was to pay for the music, and then archive it so that people could listen to streamed music for free. If such a system was to be set up, just like a public library but over the Internet, then yes, listening to music within this system would be both legal and morally correct.

Note, however, that it would only be legal/correct as long as the music was streamed, not available for download -- because like I said, downloading something in its entirety is the same as owning it. Very different from just borrowing a library book. So in order for the free distribution of music over the Internet to work, it would have to be streamed/broadcasted by a company/government that paid for it. That way people would still be able to enjoy music for free, and would be able to buy it and support the artists if they ended up liking certain songs.

This would work like an online music library. Allowing people to download complete mp3s wouldn't work, since it would be nearly impossible to enforce any sort of return/deletion of the files, like you can with books (e.g. a fine if you don't return the book after two weeks). Also, if music is available for download for free and without any restrictions, then people will be less likely to actually buy it and support the artist. But if there are restrictions, they will be able to both enjoy the music for free and to support the artist if they want to. It will be just like enjoying a book in a library and then going out and buying it, because that way you'll own it and be able to read it at any time. The difference between listening to streamed music for free and actually owning the CD will be the same. There will be nothing wrong with streaming songs for free, so long as nobody actually got to download/own them without the artist earning any money.

There must be a fundamental difference between loaning something from a library and owning it, or the whole system will collapse. It will not be commercially viable. So yes, your library scenario is cool and awesome, but it would only work for the Internet if restrictions were applied (e.g. no downloading, only streaming). That way, people will be able to listen to the music and still not own it, and thus they will be prompted to buy the music they really like. This will be commercially viable, will support the music industry, and will help artists survive.

As long as someone, somewhere along the food chain doesn't pay for the music, that means the artist is losing money -- and I think that's wrong. So illegal downloading, where the artist doesn't get any money from any party, is wrong. 🙂

Free streaming of music, on the other hand, is right -- but only so long as no actual downloading is allowed, and the artist ends up making money from it. The legal regulation of streaming may enable such a system to exist over the Internet, where people can listen to music for free, but are still encouraged to support the artists if they actually want to own any CDs or files.

That's my opinion. What does everyone else think?

"They sicken of the calm, who knew the storm." - Dorothy Parker.

alright, I dont want this reply to become some long assed opinion debate.

I do think thou that every single thing in this world is relative. it depends on the view you take. one view is that downloading without paying money for music, movies, etc is wrong. because someone lives off it and that would mean you steal and that person cant get paid the way it could. but there is another way to look at things. we download things. and if we really like them, we buy them. that means we give money to the people we think deserve it. and it is our money so it should be a right of each and every one. next, music, movies, anime, manga, etc, these are all MONEY making industries. and that makes them not poor and therefore striving for money. I take the principle of Robin Hood in this manner. just in more egoistical way.
rich stay rich and get richer. support poor. because you like their work, music, .. other than that we all support our egoistical desires as buying/getting/acquiring merchandise we love.

in short, "illegal" downloading should be considered as advertisement. my opinion. 🙂

Illegal Downloading happens no matter which country ur in, and acutally the US is the only country who acutally cares about that stuff.

shakes fist, backwater american hick! The US is NEVER the only goverment that cares about something.

Same opinion here as in the scanslation thread. Its wrong. Simple as that.
BUT: I think the destribution system of copyrighted materials has to be adapted to the new ways of digital distribution.

P.S.

I'm not judging anyone, but things like "They are actually benefiting by the advertisement from illegal downloading" are in my eyes partially just excuses to not feel as bad about doing it. I can't draw on any hard facts, but the person/company in question would probally make more money if just a quarter of the people downloading for free payed for it than they make as a side effect of illegal downloading/piracy.

I do it myself and I'll happily hide behind my excuses and keep downloading. As with anything you can think of all kinds of situations that it might be more 'just' to download illegally, like things that haven't liscenced in your language. I can't say where the line is, all I know is I don't intend to stop downloading things like music, but I try to do it in moderation and support the band/mangaka etc when I'm in a position to do so (just another excuse? maybe).

^^

ummm I justify it with the argument of "If it wasn't free I wouldn't have paid for it (I would never have given it a chance in the first place)". Meaning I'm a poor ass mexican. But yeah if i see something I really like I'll pay for it. And the way I see it, this doesn't apply to everyone though, but in the long run I see myself wasted more money on these products when I actually have to loose change to spend on all the stuff I really liked that I got for free. A few mangas, anime, or movies I'd really like to get if I had the money.

why back in the day we didn't 'download', we had to swim to japan if we wanted fresh anime and that was only if...

I dream of a better tomorrow... where chickens can cross roads and not have their motives questioned.