Forum - View topic

NEWS: Singapore's Odex Directors Speak as Protests Continue

I'm screaming at a brick wall here anyway so I don't know why I'm even bothering.

Zac: So basically you declare anything people say in defense of downloads as details and declare that anyone who ever downloads Anime isnt a real fan and has no morals and has never contributed a cent to the industry because we all think america screws everything up.

The fanbase is growing, but sales are slumping. The product isn't worth anything to a large number of people who consider themselves "fans" but don't actually contribute to the economy of their obsession.

CCSYueh wrote:

So if I want to drive a 2008 truck instead of my 2000, I should just go to a lot to test drive one & not bring it back because I really want one, but I can't afford a new car?

Many people try to draw analogies between theft and copyright infringement, but it really doesn't work. Copying something is not "taking" it. Copyright infringement would be more like test-driving the 2008 truck, returning it, but then going home and building a truck just like it for yourself. The owner of the 2008 truck would probably prefer that you buy it instead of building one of your own, and they might even have a legitimate claim that it's in some way unfair for you to "take" the test drive when you don't plan to buy the truck and you're going to use what you learn during the test drive in order to educate yourself on how to build a copy... but there's no meaningful way that that scenario can be called "taking" the 2008 truck itself. The owner still has it. They can still drive it or sell it. You didn't take it away from them. Even if there's some misconduct of some sort in that scenario (did you lie about why you wanted the test drive?), it's not simple theft.

Similarly, all a copyright holder loses from copyright infringement is the hypothetical future profits that they claim to be entitled to because of copyright law. Those hypothetical profits don't have the same kind of natural reality that physical property has. They didn't exist until someone created them through copyright law. (Note: I'm talking about "economic" copyright. In some places there is also something called "moral" copyright, which is a different animal and not relevant here.).

CCSYueh wrote:

t;]Pretty much everyone has access to home video/dvds which all state plainly in several languages the item in the viewer's player is intended for personal use only-mass showings require the permission of the copyright holder.

Yes, and if you read this message, then you have to pay me $20. Just because they said it doesn't mean they have any legitimate right to enforce it..

CCSYueh wrote:

t;]It's not yours, don't take it doesn't work?

That doesn't work because it has nothing to do with copyright infringement.

Look, if you think downloading is "taking," wouldn't it make sense for repentant downloaders to give back their ill-gotten files? Shouldn't they get together all those fansub files and email them to the copyright holders? Wouldn't that be a good idea?

The reason it wouldn't be a good idea is a good clue to why copyright infringement is completely different from theft of physical property..

CCSYueh wrote:

t;]If I go out to dinner maybe everythings perfect except one item isn't to my taste, I would never refuse to pay for the meal over one item.

There you go again with equating copyrighted works to physical property. Once you eat the food they can't sell it to somebody else; something physical has actually been taken away. A better analogy to copyright infringement would be "I think the hamburgers at McDonalds are too expensive, so I'll stay home and cook hamburgers of my own instead. Oh, they turned out to be very similar to McDonalds hamburgers." By doing that it could be said that I'm "taking" the profits that McDonalds "should" have gotten for the burgers I would otherwise have bought... but they aren't, and shouldn't be, able to prosecute me for it.

Now, all that said, I do think there's some legitimate basis for having a copyright law. It provides a useful incentive for people to create artistic work, if they think they'll have a state-sponsored monopoly that'll help them make money. Rewarding creators is good. Commercial exploitation of work by people who aren't paying the creator, is bad. I don't participate in or encourage commercial piracy operations. But copyright is not a natural right, it isn't above question, and equating copyright infringement with theft of physical property is intellectual dishonesty.

mskala: Dude, this is the ANN boards. The place where some people apparently believe that fansubbers are out to destroy the North American anime business (and then the Japanese one, while they're at it), and where some people apparently can't even begin to imagine that fans in other countries may be in a different situation than American fans. (Disclaimer: the above sentence contains one slight exaggeration. Maybe.) I think you do make some good points, but you certainly didn't pick the best place to express them...

Not another pro- vs. anti-fansub debate, please. It ain't pretty.

dormcat wrote:

Not another pro- vs. anti-fansub debate, please. It ain't pretty.

Well, it needs to be dragged out as often as possible, until more people are made aware of the issues involved. Fansubs aren't the wonderful fantasy land Naruto fans would have you believe.

There's a lot of badness/ugly involved in them, that DOES have a negative effect on the domestic anime industry.

Quote:

The fanbase is growing, but sales are slumping. The product isn't worth anything to a large number of people who consider themselves "fans" but don't actually contribute to the economy of their obsession.

I don't necissarilly disagree with this, but is there any actual proof that the percentage of people downloading is increasing? I don't doubt that downloads take a chunk out of industry profits, but Im not entirely sold on the fact that the industry is losing increasingly more (relative to the size of the industry).

No, it is stealing plain & simple. You, like ny friend George who thought it was ok for his wife to wear an article of clothing for 2 years & then take it back as "unsatisfied" are looking for loopholes to wiggle thru.

Just because you can't physically steal a copy of an anime so the next person can't view it doesn't mean your watching it for free isn't stealing that artist''s work.

If no one sees you murder someone or if you're never caught for the murder, is the dead person any less dead just because you were never caught? I've seen far too many people express the idea it's only a crime if one gets caught.

Excuses escuses excuses.

No. Again your example is just cooked to back you up. It doesn't fly.

Paploo wrote:

dormcat wrote: Not another pro- vs. anti-fansub debate, please. It ain't pretty. Well, it needs to be dragged out as often as possible, until more people are made aware of the issues involved. Fansubs aren't the wonderful fantasy land Naruto fans would have you believe. There's a lot of badness/ugly involved in them, that DOES have a negative effect on the domestic anime industry.

Who the hell cares? Anime will never stop peeing produced

You example is not the same as the store cannot resell the returned clothing. Your friend might as well have stolen it since the store has lost that item and recieved no payment. When you download something, the company has not lost 1 of its product. All you are doing is painting everything as black and white, colors which issues rarely are.

And Downloading Anime has been subtley compared to Murder. Don't ya just love Fansub debates?

Why are your arguements any more valid than ours?

"you got it without paying so you're stealing!"

You're saying that as if it's one way.