|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
The World Wide Web has accomplished what politics hasn´t since the 1940´s, to unite the world with no borders. Governments cannot prevent internet users from sharing content, is part of our culture now.
These pirate websites allow me to view movies from all over the world that never come to my city´s movie theaters, and which I cannot view them all if I had to pay. It would be thousands of dollars by now just from watching movies and buying DVD TV series.
I have seen that the entertainment industry has actually grown with the pirate industry. So why hunt down these websites? Why not converge with free downloads and legality? Allow users to download free content but the media industry receives some of the website´s income share from add revenue. It could work out.
I personally don't download movies. However, with the amount of crapy movies out now, who really cares. Plagiarism is one thing, but a bootleg or downloaded movie doesn't attempt to change who the originator of the idea was.
I still go to the movies, when I feel it will be worth my time. The movies I watch for free or bootleg are movies I would chose to never view if I had to pay full price.
Besides, what's the difference between downloading and inviting a friend over to watch a movie that they didn't actually pay for.
Frankly, I think that downloading movies is a form of piracy that has helped to all but kill the movie and the movie theatre business. It's part of the reason why there's such a dirth of independent, repertory art movie theatres here in the United States.
Because ad revenue is a pittance and would not support the production quality if these products.
I may not make movies but I do write books. If I want to make 50c per sale and not 5c, that is my choice because it is my product. People who ignore that choice are consuming a work product without paying for it (I don't care what you call that), not matter how they manage to justify it to themselves.
They are basically saying: screw the worker. I will only pay them if I want to. And that sucks IMHO.
Why do you think free movie sites are filled with viruses, spam, etc? Because it's illegal to distribute copyrighted material...but they don't care because they're criminals. So they infect your computer --which is also legal (but they don't care). THERE'S NO FREE LUNCH! Anything worth having is worth paying for. By downloading or watching these movies you're STEALING, the same as if you shoplifted from a store.
I agree. The Internet has broken down barriers and has gotten us connected like never before. Pirate sites actually help the smaller film-makers by getting their material out to the public. Seems the whole thing is much more egalitarian than our standard social-economic system and more about sharing than just money and power.
Is that the rationalization that hub thieves, scraping our hubs, use? That it is "getting our material out to the public" and therefore benefits us?
Pirate sites have helped to almost kill the movie theatre business, and they should be illegal...and outlawed.
Theft is always a good thing and OK - to the thieves stealing from others. To the rightful owners, not so much.
That doesn't take away from the fact that you pirating the film does nothing for the continuing growth of foreign or independent filmmakers - or any filmmaker for that matter - since they won't get any money from you illegally downloading their film.
I do agree that the web has opened the doors to a whole new world in every aspect of our lives, and I do think that the entertainment industry (TV, music, video games, etc.) has to keep looking for ways to integrate the web and the Internet into their marketing and distributing structure. But your justification for downloading and pirating films doesn't necessarily reward the artist for his/her work.
Just my two cents.
The only justification I caught was that the industry has grown in spite of the thieves and that it saved the OP thousands of dollars.
Did you see something else?
The whole thread is a justification. "Downloading movies is good because I'm saving money and I get to see stuff that I wouldn't have seen any other way".
Ok, I get your point here and you are right. Actually both sides of the stury are right, it is still a theft and it opens up the world for many artists aswell as consumers. But theres no way to stop it. So my final proposition is what many companies, like Google, do when given things for free. Don´t charge for the content itself but find other ways to monetize your service, like sponsors, just like Hubpages does.
Those who want to go to the theaters will still do so because they like the experience of doing it. It is a large screen, the laughing crowd, 3D tech, popcorn... And DVD´s are like a collector’s item.
The whole point is IT CANNOT BE STOPPED. Isohunt was recently shutdown after like a 5 year lawsuit. They re-launched the site with another domain and IP address with the entire torrent library they had before. So what now? Another 5 year law suit? Now they have gotten better, the site isn´t own by anyone, an anonymous community launched from multiple servers all over the world. And they allow you to hide your IP adress so the government cannot tell if you are an American.
Whatever the government does, it will be countered by the ciber community easily. The govs don´t have the control they would like over the internet, mostly because a unity on international law would be needed, and they are very happy with "each country, its own law".
You're right - it cannot be stopped without all peoples maturing to the point they don't steal everything in sight.
But that doesn't mean that I have to accept or condone it, either. It is theft, it is unethical and immoral and it is NOT something to be a part of me. I hate it when the thieves hit me, and recognize that it is not a nice thing to do. I won't, therefore, steal from others and won't encourage others to do so.
One day people in general may advance to the point we don't have millions of thieves living among us; until then we'll just have to fight the fight to keep what is ours. Deciding that it's OK to steal, that becoming a thief because it saves money or because others do it, just isn't in the cards for an honest person.
My friend, you are getting heated!! Sounds like a presidential campaign.
Now what if I told you this is "sharing" and not stealing. Nobody is taking something away from someone else and claiming it to be their own. They are simply sharing others creations, as when you share your book with a friend. Only difference, it is massive.
You cannot compare, as others did on this forum, hub theft to file sharing. In this case it is a copyright infringement; somebody took your content and claimed it as their own, with no reference as to the original author. Not the same as file sharing.
Again, the solution lies on finding a common ground, not on "fighting to keep for what is ours" because you will fail as the industry has.
Sorry - rationalizing theft by changing the name of the act to "share" doesn't cut it either. You have still stolen material that does not belong to you and that you have no right, either ethically or legally, to.
Nor does saying that if we don't allow it we will lose because thieves will continue to steal make any difference. It is still theft, and the person stealing it is still a thief.
No, there is no common ground. You either steal or you don't. There is nothing in the middle.
If we are going to stop people stealing, we better have a very long talk with those who control the money and business that supposedly need all this protection from those villainous pirates.
Although I have had (once) a bank that lost a deposit and needed a little prompting with a receipt to come up with it, that's the only theft business has ever done to me. All business needs protection from thieves, just as individuals do - the Digital Millenium Copyright Act is a case in point as it protects both big and small business. Similarly, there are laws against stealing movies, music, etc. - it's just that thieves do not respect laws.
Yes, exactly. That's the logical move. Just like Steve Jobs said, instead of fighting piracy, offer up good deals and easy to get music on iTunes. Worked. You won't win by fighting something. The whole thing's wrong in the first place; they charge too much at the theaters to go see a movie and the industry exploits people, just like they used to charge too much for CDs; them losing a little money because of piracy is a drop in the bucket. I'm always astounded at people who defend the ones with power. Truly astonishing. Piracy if anything has handed power over to people instead of us being controlled by those who control industry. The Internet has made it possible for power to be in the hands of people not just business. So, of course, businesses don't like that. Lulz!
Is that the new rationale - that movies cost too much to go to and it is thus ethical to steal the work without paying for it? Because by that reasoning I should have a Rolls. And a Lamborghini, come to think of it.
You don't like the price, don't buy. But not buying is not a license to steal whether you have the power to do so or not.
File sharing is something you cannot. Is something that comes with technology advancements.
So what you can´t fight against, you find a way for both sides to win. Give the content for free, charge advertisers instead. Instead of collecting money from the end users, collect their consumer information instead, companies will love that. And this is why Google is king with its Adsense program. Everybody wins in Youtube, the viewer’s get it for free, the content creators get a cut from advertising and Google wins big bucks. Advertisers get their message through pin pointed to the crowd they want.
By the way, sharing your Rolls with the average Joe that dreams to sit in that car for just a couple of hours, sounds like a great business idea. Find a way to monetize it that doesn´t mean thousands of dollars, and you could have a great business idea.
When you can convince the owner of that music/video to give it to you free of charge, and at your discretion, you will no longer be a thief for stealing it without permission.
Until that time, however, you will remain a common thief for stealing the work of others without permission. The thief, after all, does not have the right to the stolen product no matter how many times he says the price of movies is too high or that he should be able to steal it without paying for it. It's not his call; it is the call of the owner just as it is with my hubs.
I wonder what you would say if bread was a million dollars a loaf and CEOs could buy loaves of bread but people in Africa starve. Oh, wait, that's what happens anyway. You don't see the full picture, just the part that fits your ideology that just happens to rule the world. I realize that's all too big for this discussion but I throw it in there anyway. Comparing writers' content and movies on pirate sites is fallacious, by the way. On the piracy sites, they don't claim ownership to the movies or put their name on it. Also, by your rationale, we ought to pay admittance for people to read our content. Otherwise, it's being stolen from us because everyone visiting this site can read it and we only get paid a tiny bit from ad revenue. I suppose hording and not sharing, self-interest and division is the way of the world. But not for long.
You signed up for the deal here. So you agreed to it and that's what you should get.
I signed up to the deal on amazon, so I should get 30% of cover.
That money pays for the bread I eat. Wonderbread mostly. It's cheap.
You're right - it's a difference in ideology.
I think you can own something - you have the absolute right of control over it. No one can take it from you (recognizing that "might makes right" always wins in the long run, whether ethical or not).
You have the view that if you think something is too expensive you have the right to take it - to steal from the owner. This is something I very much disagree with and it doesn't matter if you are starving or not, if you're wanting a movie really bad or not, or if the owner simply doesn't want to share or not. All that matters is that it is not yours, you have no right to take it and doing so makes you a thief.
And no, there is no difference between a hub and a movie. I choose to make my hub free to read online (but not copy), movie owners do not do so, but that doesn't make the rights of ownership any different.
Thank you. You got it.
There are incredible business opportunities in the world FREE sharing. Just got to get the angle of it.
I do not condone stealing, but the modern world has this need for content and someone is always going to find the way to provide it, even when the industries want to put a price on everything.
Would it be all right if I "share" your car for a month or so?
You don't condone stealing, but will do it anyway in the name of sharing what others own. Gotta love that ability to rationalize!
You just don´t like to budge from your beliefs, do you. Thats OK.
No, I wouldn´t like it if someone stole my car and called it stealing. Yes, I agree with this and I hope is anyone does it he ends up a long time in jail. But the law can do this. The law can´t control file sharing. Get it??? Take a look at history.
Alcohol used to be illegal in the US. Law couldn´t control it, the laws changed to turn a problem into a solution. Sometimes culture is bigger than the given norms of society. Society nowdays says stealing a car is bad, but file sharing not so bad.
And if the law can't effectively control theft that means it's OK to steal. Tell that to store managers fighting million dollar per year shoplifting problems.
But I get it. I just don't agree - it's not OK to steal whether you can get away with or not and that's something most people can recognize. And "society" does not say that stealing music and videos from artists and producers is OK, just the thieves that do it say so. Again, changing the factual, descriptive words "steal" to "sharing a file" doesn't change the act one bit and doesn't change a thief into anything but another thief feeding off the efforts of others.
"Thief" implies that something tangible was stolen or that the owner has incurred a loss. If a pirate wants to check out a movie and can pirate it, he will do so, but if his only option is to pay for it, he may not be interested enough to do so and will pass.
So if he was never going to pay for it anyway, it doesn't count as a loss for the producer, and thus no actual theft has occurred if the item was, indeed, pirated.
Is it still douchey? Yeah. Is it theft? Nope.
Will the thief (and it IS a thief by definition) keep it or give it away or sell it? If he puts out even one copy then it is a loss unless you got through the whole rationalization all over again.
1 a : the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it
b : an unlawful taking (as by embezzlement or burglary) of property
Online legal dictionary:
A criminal act in which property belonging to another is taken without that person's consent.
Notice that neither definition concerns itself with loss. Just removal of property without permission.
Anyone can argue about the merits and benefits of downloading, and make recommendations as to what the companies, distributors, artists, etc. can do, and all that is valid. But that still doesn't justify the act in the present. If the courts do something in the future that legalizes digital piracy, then so be it. But that hasn't happened yet. It is still illegal now, regardless of what your feelings are, or what you think should be done.
I guess the debate will remain like this. It is an illegal act, and the matter of if it is THEFT is still there to be discussed.
I download movies, music and books. The whole series of Game of Thrones and Wheel of Time I have found right there for the taking, just when I was about to buy the books from Amazon. It saved me hundreds of dollars since both collections sum up to more than 20 books.
I know I´m doing something illegal, but under my personal moral rule book this is acceptable. I know, I know, I am a thief and will not justify my theft with excuses. I love to watch movies and read books, lots of them. I do it because it is easy and no one will punish me for doing it. Because no one can prevent me from doing so. And that is what I´m trying to get across.
If you want to distribute your book in digital form, this is something you will suffer. You will benefit from massive instant distribution but suffer the piracy of the medium. Crying about it won´t solve anything. Getting advantage from a free distribution system like this to monetize it in some other way; like subscribers, special editions, a collector’s edition, personal coaching or who-knows-what is brilliant. Make FREE distribution legal and enjoy its benefits.
You have decided it is okay to take someone's work product and not pay for it basically just because you want to. In my opinion that makes you a freeloader. I am not surprised to see you are using copyright photos on your hubs too. That goes the extra step of saying "you shouldn't make money for your hard work, but I will!"
As for piracy, what works for me is sending DMCAs and invoicing people who have been using my work without paying. As a result I still make a nice income from the majority of people who choose to pay for what they consume instead of being parasites.
Didn´t know I was using photos wrongly on my hubs. I always try to reference from where they came from and thus redirecting traffic there. Don´t know what is the proper format.
No excuse for the movies, I´m a freeloader and a parasite then.
Format has nothing to do with it; nearly all photos on the web are copyrighted and thus illegal and unethical to take. Just as the movies are.
Only when a photo has explicit permission to use may it be copied and put onto your hub. Same as the movies.
All I can say to that is that I'm glad you're not MY neighbor. You have lots of company, though - there are quite a few others that have decided their "personal morals" let them go through life as a thief as well. It's a convenient way to save money, I suppose, if you can live with yourself.
If he wants to justify freeloading he should at least use one of the more coherent self-serving moral workarounds like "data wants to be free". Of course then he would also need to turn off his hubpages ads to avoid being a hypocrite.
"but the modern world has this need for content and someone is always going to find the way to provide it"
As the modern world has a huge "need" for movies and he doesn't want to pay for it, he will "provide" it, at least to himself, through theft.
You guys take this discussion so seriously. I like that.
Wilderness, what I said if the thruth, an ugly thruth of what is going on, not a justification to endorse piracy. I actually agree with you people.
I guess I´m a hypocrite Psychoskinner, if you wont see it any other way.
Good luck both of you with your work, Ipm guessing both make their income from online writting. Cannot promise I will stop... freeloading is the term? But I do understand your argument.
Your neighbor´s kids probably do what I do. So do you feel unsafe? It is a very convenient way of saving money and learning lots of things. It opened the world to people from all countries and social conditions. We now have the chance of knowing anything we want, because it cannot be controlled or put a price on. Law and industry both will find a way to cope in a positive way with all this in the near future, as so many companies have and made loads of money from free distribution.
I can live with myself Wilderness. I understand your point of view and that of Psycheskinner. No need to get all aggressive and republican on me for being open. All of my comments have been an approval of your ways of thought, but proposing a way to use piracy as an advantage for commercial gain. This whole tread was about the solution not the issue.
Republican? I am a card-carrying socialist, as such I oppose any system where the worker is not paid a fair amount of money for his or her labor. I am not Google who can keep losing money and hoping to find a solution, I need to pay rent every month in the present time period.
Yes, people do selfish things, especially kids. It is easier to understand with kids because they are impulsive and don't yet really understand a world where everyone has to pay their bills.
I think the best solution right now is to make digital stuff easy to pay a fair rate for (my books go for as little as 99c or less via aggregate sellers), and suppress the activities of those who choose not to do so (the itunes system, or in aggregate the netfix system).
You solution is to use an ad or premium product system that will cut my income by 90% (based on data from people like Steven King who have tried it) and leave me unable to pay my bills. Or you suggest I should not release digitally and so not even let lower income, visually disabled or overseas people access my work (if I took that approach I might actually deserve to be pirated).
Do you have a more plausible solution, or a reason why you keep consuming for free when you know that no system currently exists to pay the person who made the product you are consuming? Because to me saying "Dowloading Free Movies is OK and Good" is not solution-based approach. At all.
I am not being aggressive, I am being vehement. This is not an matter of abstract philosophizing for me for me. If I can make money and give away free books, great! but until that happened it is not OK or Good to take my stuff. It is selfish and bad. People who want free books have a few centuries of out of copyright literature at their disposal as well as all the books by hobbiests that they choose make available for free.
by Andrew Spacey4 years ago
Thieves are stealing our articles.What can we do?Internet thieves are laughing their heads off,all the way to the bank in many cases. All they need do is copy content, sit back and enjoy the rewards. What can...
by donotfear2 years ago
Seriously, I want to know. I went to a site called <links removed>. I was able to watch a couple of movies, but most of them wouldn't play; they want you to download a certain plug-in an that's a...
by Timid Networker2 years ago
Just wondering if there are some folks out there who have made it big in the MLM world ...
by thaivalentine6 years ago
In doing research on the entertainment industry, I was frightened by my findings. It seems the industry clearly celebrates and glorifies bad behavior. Some examples, Kim Kardashian (Got famous from releasing...
by Dan Harmon4 years ago
I recently filed about a dozen DMCA's and have gotten pretty good results. A couple google or godaddy asked for more specific information as to where the problem text was on the site, but all but one have been taken...
by James Ranka6 years ago
What do you think of the recent music file sharing case where a jury ordered a man to pay $625,000?This person could have simply paid .99/song. Instead, he illegally stole the music from the Internet and shared the...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.