If a CD gets stolen, you can never, ever sell that particular CD again. Its value in resources and the wholesale price the store paid are lost. Ironically, the music industry doesn't lose out one bit, so they really don't care about this.
Downloading an album from the internet doesn't stop the copyright holder sell one single additional album to other people since it's merely a digital copy.
Now, for its own statistics, the industry naturally assumes that you would have otherwise legally purchase the album had you not had the opportunity to illegally download, hence leading to the IMHO skewed view that downloading is (automatically) the same as stealing a physical object. But that you would have purchased it otherwise is by no means certain.
Assuming, just for the sake of a theoretical discussion, that you download an album you would otherwise never, ever have considered shelling out even a few pence for and you don't pass it on to other people, where, please, is the damage to the industry?
The artist, studio, etc etc and all the people who worked to make that album don't get PAID for the work they did to create while you still get to reap the benefits of their WORK to create it. You are deriving GAIN from their WORK without paying for it. That is theft, plain pure and simple.
Had you stolen the CD, there would be an actual loss.
A pointed out above there is loss. Loss of compensation for their WORK that you STOLE from them. You took without paying. Theft. Pure and simple.
Also, what about somebody who downloads music, a movie or a tv show to check it out or see it before it airs in their own region, but plans on and actually DOES go out and buy the damn thing as soon as possible? Where is the damage to the industry?
Had you stolen a CD or a DVD, there would be an actual loss.
Again, you are getting a gain from their work without compensation. Work for free all the time if you like to have your work given away for nothing.
HOWEVER, there are a few additional things I need to point out. For one, IMHO there is a huge difference between illegally downloading something for yourself or actually distributing contents that is not your own.
No, there is not. Doesn't matter whether you are stealing for yourself or for others, it is still theft.
Distributing basically means directly competing with the copyright holders on the market. You're taking market share from them, hence limiting the amount they will sell. Plus you have an unfair advantage since you're selling for free.
All that is a different kind of theft. tealing for yourelf is still stealing, only a different kind. Doesn't make it anymore acceptable.
That, obviously, leads to a bit of a dilemma. Although I don't download illegally myself, I don't think it's such a big issue, as you can probably tell. I do think distribution is, however. And without illegal distribution, there would be no illegal downloading.
Theft is theft whether you are the end user knowingly downloading stolen material or stealing ti and distrubuting.
I'm appalled at some of the drastic penalty inflicted upon illegal downloaders by the music industry in particular. I'm even more appalled by the fact that some courts have been willing to go along with this.
Punishment always has to be measured by how severe the offence was. And, I'm sorry, but downloading a few songs illegally does not warrant punishments in the thousands of Dollars or Euros or even imprisonment (though I don't know if the latter has ever happened yet).
I'm not. You steal, you pay the price. Simple as that.
The simple truth is this: The times have changed, the industry (or industries) have not or are only slowly doing so. Had they been quicker to see how things were developing, they could have avoided a lot of this, but they felt it was simply easier and probably more fun to rake in the cash the way they always have.
Remember how it was when there were tape decks and VHS recorders? Basically, not a single copyright holder gave a damn about this, and people got used to the fact that you could, legally (except in Australia, I take it) get music, films and TV shows.
From a consumer perspective, what has changed? It's just the matter of obtaining the material, that's it. You go onto the internet instead of firing up your VHS machine.
None of which excuses theft.
It's also very interesting to see how the film industry, for example, is now placing such a premium on the fact that you're not actually, well, not really, anyway, obtaining a DVD that is yours but rather a license that lets you view their film under certain conditions.
Well, if it's a license, why can't I go to the cinema where I pay for the license and showing and then legally download the film since I've paid for the license? Or get the DVD at a cheaper rate, paying only for materials and shipping?
Because you are paying that theater and the film company for THAT viewing only.
I believe models like this are at least being tested (not quite up to date on this), but it's so incredibly late in the making, it hurts.
The obvious reason the industry isn't doing this is since it doesn't get them as much money as selling you the same thing over and over again. But, really, I think you just can't have it both ways.
It's THEIR work and NOT YOURS. They are allowed to control it. Again, if you want to give your rights and work away for free, feel free to do so and no one will stop you.
Look at the amount of people who think nothing of illegally downloading or sharing files with friends (the latter of which existed even before the internet though it was using tapes and recording from LPs, tapes and later CDs).
It's ubiquitous. And it's simply something you have to deal with since, it would almost seem, we have a societal consensus here on what's right or at the very least not wrong.
I don't think criminalization is any help. Or certainly not in the way it's being implemented. What a slap in the face to actually go out and buy a DVD, for example, and then not being able to skip those horrible "you wouldn't steal a car.." videos that come at you EVERY SINGLE TIME you put in your DVD.
All of which is an excuse to rationalize theft. Pure and simple. The lamest of defenses is the "but everyone else is doing it" defense. Just becuase someone else is a thief doent' give you license to be a thief. Guess the lesson of not giving in to peer presure idn't stick with you.
Oh, and then there's nonsense like region coding, DRM, rootkits, and what not. The problem is that, on many levels, you often get the better product if you go with the illegal version.
Another way to rationalize theft. Don't like your choices at the Sony store in Boston well steal from the Sony store in London instead. That's no excuse to steal.
