E-Book Piracy -- DOMS, MANICLION?

[2tomlinson]

A few months back, some members posted a fierce defense of their right to download pirated music and films without compensating the artist. What about books? This from CNN:


When Dan Brown's blockbuster novel "The Lost Symbol" hit stores in September, it may have offered a peek at the future of bookselling.

On Amazon.com, the book sold more digital copies for the Kindle e-reader in its first few days than hardback editions. This was seen as something of a paradigm shift in the publishing industry, but it also may have come at a cost.

Less than 24 hours after its release, pirated digital copies of the novel were found on file-sharing sites such as Rapidshare and BitTorrent. Within days, it had been downloaded for free more than 100,000 times.

 

[phosphor]

I pirate shit all the time... except mens asses. If I like it, I'll buy it afterwards - but I may be in the minority. Games for instance. It is easier to DL, mount and install the game and put the bought code in later - after the installed no-cd crack and BS intrusive copyright 'protection' is nullified. Ebooks? I have enough books to fill a room and the fuck if I am buying them over again just to put them on my kindle. Then there is the fact that actual hard copies are cheaper than e-books often. That's fucked up. Then when trying to get a book, it's unavailable on amazon, but still on hardcover - but doing a torrent search and like magic, it's available?

If D.Browns book is good, I will buy it. But if it were horseshit, I would not be out the cash. The download figures are complete bullshit when you factor in people like me.

 

[Arnold]

Print is dying fast.

 

[2tomlinson]

If D.Browns book is good, I will buy it. But if it were horseshit, I would not be out the cash. The download figures are complete bullshit when you factor in people like me.

This does make sense. Just because someone downloads a pirated book doesn't mean they would have bought it.

 

[DOMS]

A few months back, some members posted a fierce defense of their right to download pirated music and films without compensating the artist. What about books? This from CNN:


When Dan Brown's blockbuster novel "The Lost Symbol" hit stores in September, it may have offered a peek at the future of bookselling.

On Amazon.com, the book sold more digital copies for the Kindle e-reader in its first few days than hardback editions. This was seen as something of a paradigm shift in the publishing industry, but it also may have come at a cost.

Less than 24 hours after its release, pirated digital copies of the novel were found on file-sharing sites such as Rapidshare and BitTorrent. Within days, it had been downloaded for free more than 100,000 times.

Clarification:

I support downloading music for one reason: I have already been charged, found guilty, and sentenced for piracy--all without ever seeing a cop or a judge.

Every time I've purchased a blank CDROM, I've paid a fee to the RIAA. I've purchased literally thousands of CDROMs for backup up my data files and I've paid the RIAA for the privilege. That's why I have no problem pirating music.

However, I don't listen to much music, and what I do listen to, I support the artist by buying it. I bought the last (double) album by the RHCP. I also listen to meditation music, which I also purchase.

Keep in mind that the RIAA are also the same fuckers that tried to get a law passed (via politicians they've purchased) that would have put repeat down-loaders in jail for 10 years. There are murderers that have received shorter sentences.

As for the downloading of that book. It's neither moral or legal. However, the idea that each download results in lost money for the copyright holder is a fallacy perpetrated by the RIAA and MPAA. In addition to the idea that piracy is theft. It's copyright infringement, not theft. No one has been deprived of a possession.

As for movies, I use Netflix and Redbox to meet my needs. I also like to go to the movie theaters. I go once or twice a month. Sometimes more.

Again, the mentality of the corporations moves me to not care one whit that people pirate their content. Corporations have damaged society with the perversion of copyright law. I have no sympathy for them.

Disclosure: I work in two fields that are open to piracy.

 

[DOMS]

I pirate shit all the time... except mens asses.

Just looking for clarification.

So you...pay for men's asses then?

 

[myCATpowerlifts]

Clarification:

I support downloading music for one reason: I have already been charged, found guilty, and sentenced for piracy--all without ever seeing a cop or a judge.

Every time I've purchased a blank CDROM, I've paid a fee to the RIAA. I've purchased litterally hundreds of CDROMs for backup up my data files and I've paid the RIAA for the privilege. That's why I have no problem pirating music.

However, I don't listen to much music, and what I do listen to, I support the artist by buying it. I bought the last (double) album by the RHCP. I also listen to meditation music, which I also purchase.

Keep in mind that the RIAA are also the same fuckers that tried to get a law passed (via politicians they've purchased) that would have put repeat down-loaders in jail for 10 years. There are murderers that have received shorter sentences.

As for the downloading of that book. It's neither moral or legal. However, the idea that each download results in lost money for the copyright holder is a fallacy perpetrated by the RIAA and MPAA. In addition to the idea that piracy is theft. It's copyright infringement, not theft. No one has been deprived of a possession.

As for movies, I use Netflix and Redbox to meet my needs. I also like to go to the movie theaters. I go once or twice a month. Sometimes more.

Again, the mentality of the corporations moves me to not care one whit that people pirate their content. Corporations have damaged society with the perversion of copyright law. I have no sympathy for them.

Disclosure: I work in two fields that are open to piracy.

Good shit Nyiggaaa!

 

[DOMS]

Also, I hate advertising. Especially when it's forced on me on a product I've purchased.

 

[Radical]

Print is dying fast.

Not in the digital world.

 

[maniclion]

I buy lots of E-books just because of convenience(well not just since I hope to be published and make a career of it I pay those who I want to be like).

To pirate a book I'd have to DL it on my home comp. then figure out a way to sneak it into my Iphone or Ipad, it's much easier to just go to Itunes on my device and pay the money to have the product....

What I think I should be able to do is walk into a bookstore and grab a hardcopy of the books I already bought in electronic form and only pay the usually 5 dollars or so difference. Sometimes I find a book of poetry I bought in Ebook form is good enough that I'd like an organic copy of it, I have to pay again + the oil fees + brick & mortar fees, etc

I also buy a lot of Audiobooks from Audible.com, not that subscription shit it's a ripoff, plus many free from Gutenberg...

Also have a whole lot of free classics from Project Gutenberg...

Right now I am searching for Torrents of the surrealist magazine Minotaure or some kind of electronic archive if it exists....

Also many other anti-"establishment" periodicals & other media. I have an art piece in mind where I show how antiestablishmentarianism gets absorbed into the consumerist propaganda machine.....

I don't know what flipped inside my brain but I have been seeing visions of several different art creations in my mind. one is a wall painted like a riot squad with riot helmets placed on top and the protestors easily stepping over on stilts, just silly stuff but powerful messages inside the ideas....

 

[phosphor]

Just looking for clarification.

So you...pay for men's asses then?

Wow.. I opened my ass up for that one. Doh!

 

[Gazhole]

Totally 100% agree with DOMS on this one.

Not only is this going on in the movies, music, and (now) the book industry, but video games companies are now looking for ways to stop second hand/preowned games from being sold. Often they will purposely hold back content to sell it later in DLC format, or stop you from playing online without purchasing a special code that lets you do so.

Never mind that video games are obscenely expensive these days. Dunno how it is in the states, but most Xbox 360 games are upwards of £40. A lot are pushing £50.

I've recently downloaded four albums. Three of them i didn't like, so i deleted them (why have shit you don't like on your PC?) the fourth was excellent and i fully intend to buy it when it comes out. I have done this several times this year, and if i can't find a particular album by that artist i will usually buy another of their albums or a DVD or shirt or something to make up for the fact that i downloaded an album i can't find in a store.

I don't watch a hell of a lot of movies, and when i do it's usually on a laptop while i'm doing some work. I usually download movies i already own on DVD for this reason, because it's easier. But again, if i like a new movie that i've downloaded i'll try my best to buy it. If i don't like the movie i'll delete it, so how does either of these things harm anybody?

Not to mention that a lot of things i download i don't value high enough to actually buy for the retail price. This kinda ties in back to the video games. I refuse to spend £50 on a game that might turn out to be shit, or worse (and this is becoming a trend) unfinished! Bought Fable II a few years ago for the 360. Fucking thing only worked properly after a big update on xbox live - if i didn't have xbox live i would have had a junk game and £40 less in my wallet.

I'm considering cracking my console for this very reason to try out games before i get them retail.

Companies putting all these extra restrictions, charges, and caveats into their products is actually turning more people towards piracy. If somebody is downloading your shit, don't put the price up to re-coop your costs. Take the price DOWN so it's actually more attractive to buy it. If i bought a shitty game for £10-20 i wouldn't really care too much. If it was a GREAT game for that price i would immediately tell everybody else to go out and buy it.

To sum up - fuck the RIAA, fuck Dan Brown, and fucking fuck fuck fuck.

 

[OfficerFarva]

I download music, movies, and games mostly for the reasons Gaz just described. If I really like a band or musician I'll watch them perform live when they're in my area. If the movie's really something I want to see I'll go watch it in theaters. I still like buying books; there's something about reading it on paper and being able to hold it that I prefer to the E versions.

 

[suprfast]

I started downloading my accounting text books. Fuck the publisher for changing two problems in the whole book and making the instructor have to use a NEW edition. When people complain its the professor they are wrong, its always the publisher. There are more than enough people out there not willing to download the "whatever" that the author still gets a damn good cut. If they want to bitch about getting paid Caltrans is hiring and they can stand around and watch one guy digging a hole.

Torrent list - Demonoid (good for educational style books, ie school books).

isohunt.com
piratebay.org


Millions of other random sites. I love my kindle and have bought two books to this date. I also love the fact that i can preview the book before I buy or try desperately to bootleg it. Best part of all is my wife has one too and we read some of the same books. Shitty part is when we actually buy it I cant read it on my kindle. Why the fuck not I bought it. In return to the stingy DRM kindle added, i now strip all my bought books(wife reads a lot and buys quite a few, so I know we are paying for these guys to go to the local starbucks everyday), of their DRM and share them with friends.

Its ironic we couldnt get the book 1984 by george orwell. I think its available now.


By the way GAZ, you are looking like a damn beast. Ill pay for that mans ass(in reference to ass paying above).

 

[DOMS]

Not only is this going on in the movies, music, and (now) the book industry, but video games companies are now looking for ways to stop second hand/preowned games from being sold.

This is why we have Steam. You're not allowed to resales your purchased game. I have not once resold a game, but it should continue to be my right.

I don't buy many games (mostly sandbox and adventures games), but when I do, I buy the collector's editions. I really enjoy the Fallout series (played since Fallout 1). Until New Vegas they've only used CD checks for copy protection. New Vegas required that I register it with Steam to even install the game. Fuck that. If the next game has that, I won't buy it. I'll just pirate it. That will be a real loss of a sale.

I buy the game, I spend my hard earned cash, and they try to rob my of basic consumer rights and treat me like a pirate. Fuck that and fuck them!

The American auto manufacturers tried to kill the used car industry back in the 70s, 80s, and 90s. That worked out so well for them that Toyota became the #1 car manufacturer.

Not to mention that a lot of things i download i don't value high enough to actually buy for the retail price. This kinda ties in back to the video games. I refuse to spend £50 on a game that might turn out to be shit, or worse (and this is becoming a trend) unfinished!

Or how about buying a game that has 4 to 8 hours of game play? Or games than stop without an ending, so that you have to buy the next one to see the game finish? Or DLC that should have been in the game already?

 

[MDR]

I download music, movies, and games mostly for the reasons Gaz just described. If I really like a band or musician I'll watch them perform live when they're in my area. If the movie's really something I want to see I'll go watch it in theaters. I still like buying books; there's something about reading it on paper and being able to hold it that I prefer to the E versions.

I hope there are enough other people like you who still enjoy books to keep the industry producing print material. I also really enjoy the tangible feel of a book in my hands. Unfortunately, too many great books are going out of print because of the competitive nature of the publishing industry.

 

[2tomlinson]

Totally 100% agree with DOMS on this one.

Companies putting all these extra restrictions, charges, and caveats into their products is actually turning more people towards piracy. If somebody is downloading your shit, don't put the price up to re-coop your costs. Take the price DOWN so it's actually more attractive to buy it. If i bought a shitty game for £10-20 i wouldn't really care too much. If it was a GREAT game for that price i would immediately tell everybody else to go out and buy it.
To sum up - fuck the RIAA, fuck Dan Brown, and fucking fuck fuck fuck.

DOMS and I disagree on this about 80%, but he (I used to think he was a she because of the hypnotic avatar) seems to take a softer stance when it comes to pirating books vs movies and music. Maybe because the film and music industries are such historic cesspools of soul rapers who have either fucked or fucked-over every artist brave enough to risk association. (See Hunter Thompson quote below.) That's not true of the book publishing industry (the self-publish scammers not included) which has, historically, been fair and equatable with its authors. When a book is published, the writer owns the copyright. It is his or her exclusive intellectual property by virtue of being the property's soul creator. That property can be bought, or sold -- or stolen. I agree that every pirated book does not mean a missed sale. I agree that a pirated book may motivate a reader to buy other books in the author's list. So far so good. But a pirated book is still theft -- the unauthorized seizure of another person's personal property that he or she had to work their ass off to produce. As to cutting prices to catalyze sales, consider this: Let's say a publishing houses pays a writer a $100k advance upon acceptance of a novel. If the house is to profit from that advance, it must then also invest another $400k to produce at least seventy thousand copies of a novel (without guarantees anyone will buy it) and another $100k in promotion, book signing tours etc. to motivate sales. Total investment: $600k. If the house sells half of the seventy thousand copies (which is damn good) it stands to make a profit of about $225k which is great, but still a hell of a risk. But here is the important part: how much does the novelist make? If a book retails for $25, he or she will make about $3 per sale (as compared to $7 for the publisher) -- that's what you're stealing when you pirate a book. Three bucks from someone who has worked their ass off to succeed in one of the most competitive businesses in the world. And the writer doesn't receive a cent until his $100k advance is paid in full (which means no royalties at all until 33,000 confirmed copies sold.) In other words, yes, a writer can make a lot of money, but it's rare (fewer than 250 US writers make more than $500k a year) And publishers can do well (although fewer and fewer) but I know of no example of the gross profiteering that is common in the film and oil industries, and maybe the gaming and music industries, too, but I'm unsure about that. Manclion's stance on book theft is very different from his earlier posts about films and music. Why? I can only guess. He's a writer, so maybe it comes down to stealing from one individual who has created a unique, original property that is his, only his, heart-and-soul; a man or woman who has bills to pay, like everyone else.

"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." HUNTER S. THOMPSON

 

[DOMS]

But a pirated book is still theft

No, it is not theft. Theft involves depriving someone else of a physical object.

Theft: "Criminal law the dishonest taking of property belonging to another person with the intention of depriving the owner permanently of its possession."

When you download a book, it's copyright infringement. You didn't go to someone else's house and take their book.

The reason I'm softer towards copyright infringement when it comes to published items is, as you said, the industry is overall (textbooks exempted) fair to the writer and the reader.

 

[DOMS]

And the RIAA is backing a bill for warrantless searches in California.

 

[suprfast]

Text books are a joke, but I buy quite a few real tangible paperbacks if its good enough.
Im a big foodie and bought quite a few Michael Pollan books even though I boot legged them on the INTERNETTTTSSSSSSSSSSS first. I own a paperback of The Omnivore's Dilemma. Maybe I have a sore spot for him because he is a professor and a UC.

There are a lot of books that are not worthy of buying. My wife reads so much and so fast that sometimes she runs out of good quality books to read. Before I knew about bootlegging I could have saved 30 bucks for two days worth of reading on what she calls, "one of the worst written series of all time." She was refferring to the teen heart throb trash eclpise and whatever the other series are called.

We have harry potter also, but actually went out and bought the hardback collection. Im with Dom(or whomever said it). If its good enough to purchase, ill purchase.

As for movies, they can all go suck a fat one. Multi billion dollar industry...fuck them and fuck metallica for starting all this on music. Its the rich that always complain they don't have enough money. If the movie companies didnt jack the prices so damn high id probably go more. Cause and effect.
If apple didnt corner the market with the itunes store thing and overcharge for a single song I wouldnt have to download them.

 

[DOMS]

We have harry potter also, but actually went out and bought the hardback collection. Im with Dom(or whomever said it). If its good enough to purchase, ill purchase.

A lot of pirates say this.

True, some people pirate because they're cheap. But a much larger percentage pirate because they simply can't afford it. Another large group, the one I fall into, condone pirating for the way that the corporations treat the people.

fuck metallica for starting all this on music.

Metallica is such a piece of shit. They got their rise to fame from people copying tapes and passing them around. But now doing that is evil.

I've never been a Metallica fan, but I've talked to those who were. They all pretty much said the same thing. They said that Metallica started bitching about piracy when their fans stopped buying their albums because they didn't like them.

Go figure.

 

[Hench]

A lot of pirates say this.

True, some people pirate because they're cheap. But a much larger percentage pirate because they simply can't afford it. Another large group, the one I fall into, condone pirating for the way that the corporations treat the people.



Metallica is such a piece of shit. They got their rise to fame from people copying tapes and passing them around. But now doing that is evil.

I've never been a Metallica fan, but I've talked to those who were. They all pretty much said the same thing. They said that Metallica started bitching about piracy when their fans stopped buying their albums because they didn't like them.

Go figure.

THIS!

If something's independent and I enjoy it, then they'll get my money. But fuck manufactured musicians and fuck Hollywood movies, they're cash cows intended to suck us dry.

For the most part writers are exempt from this, I still buy the majority of my books (I prefer to read a hardcopy) but I'll never pay for music/films again.

 

[2tomlinson]

No, it is not theft. Theft involves depriving someone else of a physical object.

DOMS is wrong on this point -- he is too smart not to know he is wrong when it comes to the letter of the law (morality, ethics are entirely different questions) but he is too stubborn to admit it. State and federal case law unequivocally recognize intellectual property as wholly owned private property or chattel property -- a "physical object" as a requirement is DOMS' invention. It has nothing to do with legal realities, and not his best effort at dodging the facts. (I've read your posts, pal; many of them impressive, but you're way off the mark here.) He is, once again, confusing copyright infringement and plagiarism with stealing an intellectual property outright. Two very different offenses in the eyes of the law. Individuals and corporations are prosecuted regularly for the theft, or attempted theft, of intellectual properties. Period. No breaking-and-entering required. No "physical object" or similar manifestation of the property required. The most notorious of these cases involve drug companies stealing formulas, Silicon Valley companies stealing software -- internationally, China stealing technological secrets, and aquaculture protocols. Read the papers. An intellectual property IS personal property. Far more easily rationalized when one is stealing from a mega-corporation. But when it comes to books (and independent artists in the music business) the thief is taking a few important bucks from the creator of that product -- however the thief rationalizes it.

 

[phosphor]

I don't give a shit. Every time I buy a fucking bluray for 20 - 25 bucks, I rarely watch it more than twice then it collects dust or better yet - gets all scratched up by the kids and it's fucked. 25 for watching a movie once. Riiight. Like i said, if it's damned good and I will buy for sure. Example: band of brothers. I bought 3 copies - 2 dvd, 1 bluray. The 2 dvd copies got scratched up over time and went to the bluray version later. I watch that series over and over and if anyone here has not watched it, get the motherfucker now pronto.

What the RIAA and industry does is legalized theft imo. They corner the market on high demand items and charge what they would deem as the price point before sales would drop off and dangle the carrot. Sure, it's up to us to buy, but they could charge a whole lot less and still make a killing in profit. The markup and profit is obscene. Look at highly sought after game titles. Now the going price for xbox games are 60 (added 10 dollars for being on xbox) but then they still charge 60 for the same PC titles that do not have this tariff. Money grubbing shit stains.

If they want to 'rationalize' high prices, I will rationalize piracy. Simple as that.

 

[CG]

I actually prefer paper to e-books. I could do the ebook thing, read on my phone, tv, laptop, at work etc. However, most books I read these days are gear\bb related, so the ebook can be pirated of the hard copy is like 60-90 each, and frankly, I'm no rockafeller, 60$ for a book that might have abunch of BS just isn't in my budget

Sent from my SPH-M900 using Tapatalk

 

[DOMS]

DOMS is wrong on this point -- he is too smart not to know he is wrong when it comes to the letter of the law (morality, ethics are entirely different questions) but he is too stubborn to admit it. State and federal case law unequivocally recognize intellectual property as wholly owned private property or chattel property -- a "physical object" as a requirement is DOMS' invention. It has nothing to do with legal realities, and not his best effort at dodging the facts. (I've read your posts, pal; many of them impressive, but you're way off the mark here.) He is, once again, confusing copyright infringement and plagiarism with stealing an intellectual property outright. Two very different offenses in the eyes of the law. Individuals and corporations are prosecuted regularly for the theft, or attempted theft, of intellectual properties. Period. No breaking-and-entering required. No "physical object" or similar manifestation of the property required. The most notorious of these cases involve drug companies stealing formulas, Silicon Valley companies stealing software -- internationally, China stealing technological secrets, and aquaculture protocols. Read the papers. An intellectual property IS personal property. Far more easily rationalized when one is stealing from a mega-corporation. But when it comes to books (and independent artists in the music business) the thief is taking a few important bucks from the creator of that product -- however the thief rationalizes it.

Show me a single case where someone was prosecuted for downloading that was classified as theft, and not copyright infringement, and I'll change my tune.

Also, stealing corporate secrets isn't copyright infringement. There's a whole other set of laws for that. It's in the same group as reverse engineering.

And I'll state it one more time: the idea that someone who would illegally copy a song, movie, or anything else equates to a lost sale is a logical fallacy. Downloading for free is a much more tolerable price point than $20 for a DVD. To believe that someone who would download something for free would buy it if they had no other option is wrong thinking.

 

[phosphor]

Show me a single case where someone was prosecuted for downloading that was classified as theft, and not copyright infringement, and I'll change my tune.

Also, stealing corporate secrets isn't copyright infringement. There's a whole other set of laws for that. It's in the same group as reverse engineering.

And I'll state it one more time: the idea that someone who would illegally copy a song, movie, or anything else equates to a lost sale is a logical fallacy. Downloading for free is a much more tolerable price point than $20 for a DVD. To believe that someone who would download something for free would buy it if they had no other option is wrong thinking.

They actually get more sales from me - If I were forced to buy with no piracy available, I would have said fuckit a long time ago after buying the 100th shit album, movie and game. As it is now, if I try it and like it, I'll buy it.

 

[2tomlinson]

Show me a single case where someone was prosecuted for downloading that was classified as theft, and not copyright infringement, and I'll change my tune.

DOMS bodybuilder-up and admit you're wrong after reading the FBI's official news release pasted below. Of especial interest will be the The No Electronic Theft (NET) Act signed into U.S. law by President Clinton in 1997. True, prior to the enactment of this law, copyright infringement was the only way to prosecute. No longer true.
Also, as I've mentioned twice in earlier posts: 1.) I agree that every pirated download does not represent a missed sale. 2.) I agree that a pirated download might motivate a consumer to purchase other books or music in the artist's list. Still love those tits by the way.

(From the FBI)
It’s an age-old crime: stealing.
But it’s not about picking a pocket or holding up a bank. It's robbing people of their ideas, inventions, and creative expressions—what’s called intellectual property—everything from trade secrets and proprietary products and parts to movies and music and software.


NET
The No Electronic Theft (NET) Act was signed into U.S. law in 1997 by President Clinton. The Wired Safety website reports NET allows for prosecution of illegally downloaded music even when no attempt is made to gain financially from the download.

Prosecution
The RIAA reports U.S. law allows for both civil and criminal prosecution for illegal music downloads. Criminal prosecutions for illegal music downloads for first-time offenders can result in up to five years jail time and $250,000 fines. Civil prosecutions provide a minimum fine of $750 per illegally downloaded song.

The theft of intellectual properties is a growing threat—especially with the rise of digital technologies and Internet file sharing networks. And much of the theft takes place overseas, where laws are often lax and enforcement more difficult. All told, intellectual property theft costs U.S. businesses billions of dollars a year and robs the nation of jobs and lost tax revenues.

Preventing intellectual property theft is a top priority of the FBI’s cyber program.

 

[maniclion]

Manclion's stance on book theft is very different from his earlier posts about films and music. Why? I can only guess. He's a writer, so maybe it comes down to stealing from one individual who has created a unique, original property that is his, only his, heart-and-soul; a man or woman who has bills to pay, like everyone else.

Writers for the most part only have their writing to bank on, maybe a rare public appearance, but when you have the Snooki's of the world getting paid more than Toni Morrison to appear at an Institution of "higher" learning they can't depend on that for much longer it seems. Sometimes a writer is lucky enough to get a movie deal out of one of their creations, but that is very rare.

As far as film and music go I buy what I feel deserves money, usually not consumerist popaganda that plagues the market now, I look for musicians who can play music or sing in their own voice and aren't parrots. And film I rarely buy a dvd ever, haven't been to the movies in 3 years. I wait for it to be on HBO (only recently saw Avatar), but I am still finding movies on IFC, Sundance or TCM that inspire me, and not very many of the crap from Hollywood now could hope to be as artistic. What little music or movies I do DL for free are rare , things I wouldn't be able to find at Amazon or elsewhere and usually the artists are long dead....

 

[DOMS]

DOMS bodybuilder-up and admit you're wrong after reading the FBI's official news release pasted below. Of especial interest will be the The No Electronic Theft (NET) Act signed into U.S. law by President Clinton in 1997. True, prior to the enactment of this law, copyright infringement was the only way to prosecute. No longer true.
Also, as I've mentioned twice in earlier posts: 1.) I agree that every pirated download does not represent a missed sale. 2.) I agree that a pirated download might motivate a consumer to purchase other books or music in the artist's list. Still love those tits by the way.

(From the FBI)
It’s an age-old crime: stealing.

But it’s not about picking a pocket or holding up a bank. It's robbing people of their ideas, inventions, and creative expressions—what’s called intellectual property—everything from trade secrets and proprietary products and parts to movies and music and software.

NET
The No Electronic Theft (NET) Act was signed into U.S. law in 1997 by President Clinton. The Wired Safety website reports NET allows for prosecution of illegally downloaded music even when no attempt is made to gain financially from the download.

Prosecution
The RIAA reports U.S. law allows for both civil and criminal prosecution for illegal music downloads. Criminal prosecutions for illegal music downloads for first-time offenders can result in up to five years jail time and $250,000 fines. Civil prosecutions provide a minimum fine of $750 per illegally downloaded song.

The theft of intellectual properties is a growing threat—especially with the rise of digital technologies and Internet file sharing networks. And much of the theft takes place overseas, where laws are often lax and enforcement more difficult. All told, intellectual property theft costs U.S. businesses billions of dollars a year and robs the nation of jobs and lost tax revenues.

Preventing intellectual property theft is a top priority of the FBI’s cyber program.

This is a very brief summary in which the terms "stealing" and "theft" are in an opinion piece. This talks about prosecuting, civilly and criminally, those that illegally down...which is covered in copyright infringement law. They're even suing for copyright infringement, not stealing.