Should morpheus and napsterish programs be outlawed altogether?
 

The main purpose they serve is copyright infringement. won't the governemt eventually shut them down?

If thinking about this leads you to look @ an informative website, post a link I'm writing 20 page paper on it

Well...I don't think Morpheus should be shut down completely. It allows for file sharing other than mp3's. But yes, I think that all mp3 file sharing programs should be shut down. It's a blatant infringement of copyright, and it's not fair to the artist. If an artist wants to let out mp3's of their music, they should put it on their websites or release it to fansites.

So exactly what kinds of files do people share, which have no copyright? I doubt the majority of people use their computers to create any files other than text documents, and even less will create any files that other people would be interested in downloading.

I say no - this argument has been beaten into the ground already, and mp3s allow people to hear music they otherwise wouldn't hear.

its not just an mp3 thing either- there's tons of copyrighted software availible on there. i've read windows is even on there. i wouldn't know, i'm on a 56k one phone line 4 dudes so i dont bother with file sharing

well it hasnt really because Congress still doesn't know how to handle this because its so new and so popular, yet so illegal. and do you mean no it should be legal? because it seemed like you were saying the opposite b4 that

Sure windows is on there. Everything's on there. But there's a whole pirate software scene outside of peer-to-peer filesharing programs, ftp sites always have and always will allow people to get hold of the latest software. It's just filesharing software makes it a bit easier.

Just cause a fair number of bats are used for queer bashing doesn't mean that they shouldn't be sold at your regular sporting goods store, moron.

------------------
http://www.emotioneric.com/catchgf.jpg

yea, i think people will always be able to get around it even if there is a law, but i can't believe the lame excuses the file sharing companies come up with for why there shouldn't be a law against it, and i can't believe there's not one yet! it seems cut and dry to me for something like morpheus and grokster

Yeah I'm saying it should be legal. I was just arguing with the other guy's reasoning that they shouldn't be shut down, just restricted to non-copyright material. Congress doesn't know what it's doing because they have major players from several industries putting pressure on them to make these things illegal. They're trying to push a bill through right now that will require every computer (and dvd/video/cd player etc) to have a built-in copy protection system, which monitors what you're doing and restricts your activities with your own equipment.

that analogy doesnt work at all. we're talking about something whose main purpose... oh nevermind you're not worth the time i've already spent

Is every piece of software on your computer totally legal? Do you own an original release of every song you have an mp3 of?

ug. that would be terrible. do you know what that bill is called? that's the wrong way to go about it.

Hmm, where do you live? I have a bat, pedo-boy.

Its main purpose is debatable.


------------------
http://www.emotioneric.com/catchgf.jpg

http://www.stoppoliceware.org/

Doubt it matters really. Album sales havent gone down that much....

mainstream artists will be forced to focus more on live acts... what a concept.

of course not. the purpose they serve is peer-to-peer filesharing. copyright infringement is illegal, and any users who choose to use the filesharing client for that purpose is committing a crime. the scene of the crime shouldn't be demolished just because it's the scene of the crime.

it's like the handguns debate. a large number of people who buy handguns buy them for the purpose of doing evil, but does that make the handgun evil? where do you draw the line between a device and what people can use it for?

*sigh. been discussed already.

no, *insert reason here*

irrelevant

if morpheus (and those like it) were shut down and people still wanted to trade non copyrighted files, they would have ample means to do so. If wanted to grab some free copyrighted software, it would be much harder (for the average user. we wouldnt have a problem)

if they stopped the production of baseball bats, people who wanted to use baseball bats for their intended purpose would NOT have any alternate means. Yet there are plenty of things you can beat gays with. so the analogy just doesn't work

[This message has been edited by PhantomFM (edited 04-25-2002).]

before morpheus, napster, kazaa etc everyone still shared files via email, aim, or simple trade... so instead of going on kazaa someone would go "does anyone have this song?" and you would arrange to get it.

with engines like google. they arent gonna do anything but piss a few people off

Well I was talking about trading copyrighted files with the intention of buying the product after giving it a trial. Like pk said, album sales aren't really down, so all this filesharing must be for assessment purposes. A small number of people are always going to abuse the system, but are they a good enough reason to close down the service for everyone?

Yeah, it's like irc - it's been going for years, and if you go to the right channels you can get anything. It's just because the new wave of file sharers have a nice windowsy frontend that they're so popular.

Until you can police the entire internet, you can't stop shit. At least this way companies can take advantage of these new distribution channels

you can not put an end to all file sharing. it is impossible. i guess that answers your question.

i agree, and no it doesnt because i have to write 20 pages on it! so dont be frightened when i hit you all up with some mad stats in a few cause i've been researchin

i've been researching and the results are really confusing.

The number of units shipped from record companies to retail outlets and special markets dipped 10.3 percent in 2001, the RIAA said, and the dollar value of the shipments dropped from US$14.3 billion in 2000 to $13.7 billion in 2001.

yet another study said: The album market, which accounts for 93% of units is up a healthy 4.7% for the year. Among mass merchants, album sales have increased 6.4% over the prior year for the 10 months year-to-date (for 2001 in october)

It's so hard to tell because these stats are for record stores while cdnow and amazon have been growing fast. however Amazon was $78 million in 1999, CDnow was 43.6million in 2000. i imagine both of these numbers were a lot bigger in 2001 though the loss for 2001 was supposedly 600million. also it seems like "the dollar value of the shipments" would ******* albums shipped to online stores in this stat, as it is different from the 10.3% drop stat which was just for "retail outlets and special markets"

surveys are useless as some "prove" users don't buy music, they just download it now, while one done by the Yankelovich Partners said 59% of users who listened to music on the Web later bought the CD, which you know isnt true

anymore thoughts on this? my paper is due in 20 hours, i'll be here all night, possibly on aim: peacefrgsp. i've already been able to flesh out a couple of points raised here

if you've taken stats, you'll be familiar with the expression "two points to identify a fad, three points to identify a trend"

yes. record sales *were* down in 2001. i dont deny that. but look at what major fucking event happened in 2001: napster got shut down. go look at the sales figures for the last 10 years, and then take a look at what happened during 1999 and 2000, when napster was at its peak.

ill save you the time. sales went through the roof as napster gained popularity. sales then crashed as napster got shut down. if this proof of a causal relationship? no, of course not. but its still an interesting correlation, and exactly opposite to what the record companies are trying to tell us

i agree. my opinion part will support mp3 trading and oppose software trading. only problem is the record sales stats are so confusing (some say up some say down) and it seems the ones that say down don't cite anywhere so that i can use it and be able to back it up

See, if this were me, that would say 2 hours, and all the posts in this thread would be from the same date

um, its the law. you cant selectively apply it. intellectual property theft is against the law, it doesnt matter if the intellectual property in question is music, movies, books, or software

and the riaa's own stats show the fluctuation

oooh it varies alright. i can't go into it now but i'll post my paper... which im sure everyone will read

i suppose i would expect you to think that the law is variable, seeing as how you're a pedophile and all

i agree.

record companies are bitching and complaining about lagging sales because they "took a dive."

they're not mentioning that 2000 was a huge record year.

:sigh: guess back to the ol' paper