More dumbass music pirates. My attention was drawn to this quote regarding the mother of the 12-year-old defendant being sued by the RIAA:

Her mother says her daughter paid $29.99 for the downloading service [Kazaa] three months ago. Torres says if you’re paying for it, you’re not stealing it.

*sighs and counts to ten to regain control of temper*

Kazaa is a P2P (peer-to-peer) service that uses a front-end application. Not everything on Kazaa is copyrighted. But Kazaa does not directly provide or control the content. They only enable the P2P file sharing service. There is no guarantee, implicit or otherwise, that the content is legal, nor does Kazaa attempt to claim any such blanket legality of the content, per se.

The concept of stealing accompanies the concept of property rights (ownership). So who has the property rights to the copyrighted music here? Kazaa? No. And apparently Kazaa did not have license/distribution rights to the copyrighted material in question, nor are they even the originators of the stolen material.

In this case, the copyright holders did not give permission for the material to be distributed in this way. Therefore people downloading it are stealing. Kazaa subscribers are not paying for the content of the site. They are paying for the P2P service that makes the file sharing possible. The files themselves come from other Kazaa users, not from Kazaa.

C’mon guys, it’s not that hard.

7 Responses to “It's Not Stealing If You Pay For It”
  1. zeke says:

    I would say, “Its not stealing if you’re not depriving someone of posession of their property.”

    Intellectual Property is a very useful fiction. I don’t argue against it’s existence; however, the name is misleading. There is no real property involved whatsoever.

    The laws regarding Intellectual Property exist “To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries”*. These are very admirable goals. However, there is no property at stake and the crime committed in transgressing these laws is *not* theft. Theft, thievery, stealing and piracy are all words of propaganda.

    Yes, using copyrighted material without licence is breaking the law; then again, so is going 60 in a 55.

    * text from Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution.

  2. Anne Haight says:

    That’s a mildly interesting but totally unpersuasive and nonsensical argument. Sounds like a rationalization to me.

  3. Eric says:

    Who the hell pays for kazaa?

  4. THE SMART ONE says:

    ANNE YOU FUCKEN HORE, YOU STUPID BITCH WHO THE FUCK DO YOU FUCKEN THINK YOU ARE TO MAKE UP THESE RACIAL COMMENTS, AND DISTURBE THE PEACEFUL WAYS OF FUCKEN PEACEFUL PEOPLE, AGAIN YOU FUCKEN EVIL MONSTER, STOP FUCKEN BITCHING AROUND YOU FUCKEN HORE

    ANNE IT’S OBVIOUS YOUR STUPIDITY REACHES NO LIMIT. AFTER READING YOUR MONOTONOUS RACIALLY INSULTING ARTICLE(OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT) I CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT YOU DID NOT DO YOUR RESEARCH. I END MY COMMENT, BY SAYING AGAIN, THAT YOUR IDIOTIC STUPIDITY REACHES NO LIMIT. I RECOMMEND THAT YOU SEARCH FOR IMMEADIATE PSYCHOLOGICAL HELP, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY YOUR MENTALLITY IS NOT MENTALLITY, YOU IDIOTIC UNINTELLIGENT STUPID GIRL. I END THIS COMMENT BY THE SECOND TIME, BY ENJOYING MYSELF BY SAYING THAT YOU ARE MENTALLY INCAPABLE. IF YOU WISH TO FURTHER DEBATE YOUR STUPIDITY POST A COMMENT(TRY TO MAKE IT NON-IDIOTIC PLEASE)AND, I’LL ANSWER YOUR ALMOST TO HUMAN INTELLIGENCE COMMENT, AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. AND AGAIN(SINCE I KNOW MENTALLY RETARTED PEOPLE, LIKE YOU, HAVE SHORT TERM MEMORY) I MUST REMIND YOU OF YOUR IDIOTIC STUPIDITY.

  5. Dong says:

    Ann Haight:

    “In this case, the copyright holders did not give permission for the material to be distributed in this way. Therefore people downloading it are stealing.”

    By law, you are very wrong, copyright infringement is the right term. Simple.

    As one guy stated after being harassed by police for taking a picture of a Boeing 737 airplane, “If you aren’t sure about the laws, don’t try to enforce or educate others about it”

  6. dong says:

    You don’t even use the term pirate correctly. pfft, figures.

  7. B Tok says:

    Who didn’t use the term “pirate” correctly?
    According to Merriam Webster’s online dictionary, a “pirate” is “one who commits piracy”. And their third definition of “piracy” is “the unauthorized use of another’s production, invention, or conception especially in infringement of a copyright”.
    My conclusion to your short, and to the best of my understanding, uneducated post, dong, is that you just wanted to get your two cents in, no matter how silly or stupid it may have been.

    How, if a person (or persons) wrote something from their own creativity and by their own hand, and legally copyrights it, and it is for sale, for their own profit (like a paycheck), is it not stealing for a person to copy it without permission? What if your paycheck were based on inventions or something of the such, and you had a patent, and someone else started mass-producing that invention and giving it away for free? How do you think you would feel knowing that someone else caused your paycheck to decrease more and more over time? Would you not consider it stealing? I think I would.
    And if that’s not wrong… than why was I not allowed to copy, word-for-word, someone else’s research in college and claim it for my own?
    What exactly is alright about copying and distributing someone’s music, research paper, paintings, art, designs, theories, ideas, and ultimately, in the end, their money?

Leave a Reply