Where do you draw the line between freely appropriating information and calling it piracy or theft? How much or what kind of information is it okay to use?
I don't feel as if there could ever be a line drawn. Who's to say what kind of material people download on a every day basis? This is something that can't be controlled by anyone. The internet and its availabilities/options has made illegal activities so much more easier.
If any kind of restriction is ever made it should be something along the lines of the limit of information that can be downloaded per month or something along those lines; but since that sounds incredibly difficult and quite impossible there's not much anyone can do.
Movies and music are downloaded every day. It has become so available to everyone that it's a common, everyday occurrence. An example of this would be Limewire or other torrent sites. However, one place they are drawing the line is Limewire. Up until just recently people downloaded music from Limewire all the time. Now it's been shut down and deemed illegal. I think it's difficult to judge what information you can use. Limewire and other programs make it so easy to take things that people don't really think about the moral issue. The bottom line is that downloading music and movies is illegal, but generally this process won't be able to be stopped because it is already so widespread. As technology evolves, greater opportunity to do these things become available.
My opnion on where the line should be drawn between freely appropriating information and calling it theft would be when it is an offical article that someone has there name on. Obviously eveyone has there own thoughts but sometimes people think alike and some information is true in one shape and form. Therefore, the same information can be written or found by the same people. I think that whenever your going to use someone elses thoughts the best thing to do is cite your source. That way you are giving credit to the person that orginally stated that quote. However, if your going to sum up information from a site in your own words then I think there is no need to cite because its your own view and thoughts on the information.
I take as much as I need, and no more. Back when Limewire was still up and running, I could have downloaded entire albums of songs. Instead, I only took the songs I really liked. When it comes to my favorite artists I make sure to buy their complete albums instead. For movies, I don't pirate or steal them. Even so, movies make millions of dollars and the pirated versions can't make that big a dent in the profits.
Enough information to get by is okay in my book. Any sort of info, nothing should have to be purchased. Maybe if monopoly companies didn't charge so much, people wouldn't have to resort to stealing. So its their own fault for being greedy. As long as you don't get caught, which is nearly impossible considering how many people are on the Internet daily, take as much information as you can get away with.
The internet has many advantages. One of the benefits is the ability to download movies and music. The legal way to listen to music or watch movies is to pay for them, although the internet has ways for people to download them for free. This is piracy and the people who have created these works are not gaining the profits of their creation. I feel that if people pay for their music on iTunes or sites where it is legal, it is fine to share. It is the moral thing to do by following the law and making sure that the right people receive credit.
I think that when information is taken, credit needs to be given to the original source. If credit is not given, then it is considered theft. The idea is similar to when someone is writing a paper for school- it is plagiarism if the original source is not cited. I don't think that the internet should be any different. I think that it is easy enough to simply state where the information is found, so whether it be an entire article or a sentence, credit should be given so that readers can refer to the original piece and also acknowledge the original writer. I do not think it matters what kind of information is being taken. It is always theft if someone acts as though the information is their own which is what they are doing if they do not give credit by listing sources.
I think this is a very touchy topic. First and foremost, the originator of information should be the one who decides whether or not the information is available for free. But, because this is not an easy task I think that how the information is taken and used is where lines need to be drawn. As for music and movies, I understand money is being lost but the information is being used for entertainment. People downloading music and movies are most likely not doing anything harmful with the material. The biggest issue in this category is the loss of money that should be designated to the original person who produced the material. The ability to view all information is very helpful and fortunate for all who use the internet, but the users need to be conscious of who and where the information is coming from.
There is a fine line between the free appropriation of information and the label of piracy or theft. In certain cases, free sharing and copying of information is a serious issue, while in others it is common practice. In the entertainment industry, the free sharing of media, such as movies and music, is almost commonplace. With the increasing cost of downloading music from iTunes and other paid music websites, many people are turning to the world of free downloads and file-sharing.
Personally, I do not find this sharing of information as serious or criminal as the plagiarism of literature or research. Stealing intellectual property that someone owns, such as books or journal articles, is a much more serious offense.
Unfortunately, most people seem to have the "Everyone does it" mentality, which only helps to promote the practice of plagiarism. Until serious action is taken to stop them, plagiarism and piracy are forces to be reckoned with.
I think that if something is put out in order to earn a profit (like music or movies) and people are getting it for free then that should be considered theft. Other kinds of information, like the kind you can get off facebook or wikipedia, should be free since people are putting it on the internet with no expectations of recieving money. I also think any information is okay to use since it's already on the internet.
I think that I would draw the line between freely appropriating information and calling it piracy pretty wide because of the plethora of different ways that we are able to receive the information. I also think that a lot of the information that we use and obtain from public portals such as the internet should be ok to use because we are getting it from sources that are available to everyone. Things like books, music, and even t.v shows should be able to be used freely by the public because that is who they are directed towards! We shouldn't be called thiefs for accessing it right?
I understand the perspectives of big companies wanting to prevent anyone from illegally downloading information, which previously would have been paid for. Unfortunately, during this new age of technology, that only become more complex and nearly impossible. The purpose of the internet was to share thoughts, ideas and other sources of information, and although priacy is considered theft, it is something that these companies will continue to fight after and lose. It becomes very difficult to think of a solution for this problem (whether you believe that piracy should be shunned or not), considering the knowledge our generation has about downloading and getting the information (in the form of music, movies, etc). I really find it difficult to come up with a solution regarding drawing a line between freely appropriate information and piracy or theft. How do you stop something that seems to be taking over the internet? I understand both perspectives of the situatiion, and personally I do not download for the fear of getting in legal matters myself, but I do not feel strongly against those individuals who do download illegally.
I don't feel that information can be stolen or pirated. It is an amorphous organism that does not belong to a single individual; it is part of a universal fabric or text and cannot be contained within a single work or any other arbitrary container.
Information starts with one person. If it is original, they own that information. For what is that information being provided? In the academic world, the use and reuse of information is closely monitored. Any information can be used as long as it is cited and the owner of that information is credited. The theft of creative work is much harder to control. Technology has made it so much easier to reproduce all kinds of art for free. But it has also made it easier for artists to create their own work and put it out to be heard. Bear in mind that the corporate world has been screwing artists for decades.
The internet is not free. I pay for the internet service I use. I believe that anything I can access from the internet is free and should not be called theft. I think the internet can be compared to a library. Both serve the same purpose, to provide information and entertainment. I do not pay to read a book, periodical, magazine etc.If I take a cd from the library and upload it to my itunes that is not considered piracy. Why should it be considered theft when it comes from the internet? A library and the internet function the same way and should be treated as such.
Where do you draw the line between freely appropriating information and calling it piracy or theft? How much or what kind of information is it okay to use?
Its hard to define a line between freely appropriating information on the internet and piracy/theft. Piracy and theft, is clearly harmful and should be stopped. But many people argue that they pay for internet, so they technically they are paying for what the use or take. Unfortunately it is still wrong. Therefore, I honestly cannot draw the line between the two. Any kind of information is used and can be used, regardless if it free or not. Moreover, if its "free" people assume its okay to use and in some cases it is. But not everything is free, therefore making it not okay to use.
I don't feel as if there could ever be a line drawn. Who's to say what kind of material people download on a every day basis? This is something that can't be controlled by anyone. The internet and its availabilities/options has made illegal activities so much more easier.
ReplyDeleteIf any kind of restriction is ever made it should be something along the lines of the limit of information that can be downloaded per month or something along those lines; but since that sounds incredibly difficult and quite impossible there's not much anyone can do.
http://www.askdavetaylor.com/get_into_trouble_for_downloading_illegal_files.html
Movies and music are downloaded every day. It has become so available to everyone that it's a common, everyday occurrence. An example of this would be Limewire or other torrent sites. However, one place they are drawing the line is Limewire. Up until just recently people downloaded music from Limewire all the time. Now it's been shut down and deemed illegal. I think it's difficult to judge what information you can use. Limewire and other programs make it so easy to take things that people don't really think about the moral issue. The bottom line is that downloading music and movies is illegal, but generally this process won't be able to be stopped because it is already so widespread. As technology evolves, greater opportunity to do these things become available.
ReplyDeleteMy opnion on where the line should be drawn between freely appropriating information and calling it theft would be when it is an offical article that someone has there name on. Obviously eveyone has there own thoughts but sometimes people think alike and some information is true in one shape and form. Therefore, the same information can be written or found by the same people. I think that whenever your going to use someone elses thoughts the best thing to do is cite your source. That way you are giving credit to the person that orginally stated that quote. However, if your going to sum up information from a site in your own words then I think there is no need to cite because its your own view and thoughts on the information.
ReplyDeleteI take as much as I need, and no more. Back when Limewire was still up and running, I could have downloaded entire albums of songs. Instead, I only took the songs I really liked. When it comes to my favorite artists I make sure to buy their complete albums instead. For movies, I don't pirate or steal them. Even so, movies make millions of dollars and the pirated versions can't make that big a dent in the profits.
ReplyDeleteEnough information to get by is okay in my book. Any sort of info, nothing should have to be purchased. Maybe if monopoly companies didn't charge so much, people wouldn't have to resort to stealing. So its their own fault for being greedy. As long as you don't get caught, which is nearly impossible considering how many people are on the Internet daily, take as much information as you can get away with.
The internet has many advantages. One of the benefits is the ability to download movies and music. The legal way to listen to music or watch movies is to pay for them, although the internet has ways for people to download them for free. This is piracy and the people who have created these works are not gaining the profits of their creation. I feel that if people pay for their music on iTunes or sites where it is legal, it is fine to share. It is the moral thing to do by following the law and making sure that the right people receive credit.
ReplyDeleteI think that when information is taken, credit needs to be given to the original source. If credit is not given, then it is considered theft. The idea is similar to when someone is writing a paper for school- it is plagiarism if the original source is not cited. I don't think that the internet should be any different. I think that it is easy enough to simply state where the information is found, so whether it be an entire article or a sentence, credit should be given so that readers can refer to the original piece and also acknowledge the original writer. I do not think it matters what kind of information is being taken. It is always theft if someone acts as though the information is their own which is what they are doing if they do not give credit by listing sources.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a very touchy topic. First and foremost, the originator of information should be the one who decides whether or not the information is available for free. But, because this is not an easy task I think that how the information is taken and used is where lines need to be drawn. As for music and movies, I understand money is being lost but the information is being used for entertainment. People downloading music and movies are most likely not doing anything harmful with the material. The biggest issue in this category is the loss of money that should be designated to the original person who produced the material. The ability to view all information is very helpful and fortunate for all who use the internet, but the users need to be conscious of who and where the information is coming from.
ReplyDeleteThere is a fine line between the free appropriation of information and the label of piracy or theft. In certain cases, free sharing and copying of information is a serious issue, while in others it is common practice. In the entertainment industry, the free sharing of media, such as movies and music, is almost commonplace. With the increasing cost of downloading music from iTunes and other paid music websites, many people are turning to the world of free downloads and file-sharing.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I do not find this sharing of information as serious or criminal as the plagiarism of literature or research. Stealing intellectual property that someone owns, such as books or journal articles, is a much more serious offense.
Unfortunately, most people seem to have the "Everyone does it" mentality, which only helps to promote the practice of plagiarism. Until serious action is taken to stop them, plagiarism and piracy are forces to be reckoned with.
I think that if something is put out in order to earn a profit (like music or movies) and people are getting it for free then that should be considered theft. Other kinds of information, like the kind you can get off facebook or wikipedia, should be free since people are putting it on the internet with no expectations of recieving money. I also think any information is okay to use since it's already on the internet.
ReplyDeleteI think that I would draw the line between freely appropriating information and calling it piracy pretty wide because of the plethora of different ways that we are able to receive the information. I also think that a lot of the information that we use and obtain from public portals such as the internet should be ok to use because we are getting it from sources that are available to everyone. Things like books, music, and even t.v shows should be able to be used freely by the public because that is who they are directed towards! We shouldn't be called thiefs for accessing it right?
ReplyDeleteI understand the perspectives of big companies wanting to prevent anyone from illegally downloading information, which previously would have been paid for. Unfortunately, during this new age of technology, that only become more complex and nearly impossible. The purpose of the internet was to share thoughts, ideas and other sources of information, and although priacy is considered theft, it is something that these companies will continue to fight after and lose. It becomes very difficult to think of a solution for this problem (whether you believe that piracy should be shunned or not), considering the knowledge our generation has about downloading and getting the information (in the form of music, movies, etc). I really find it difficult to come up with a solution regarding drawing a line between freely appropriate information and piracy or theft. How do you stop something that seems to be taking over the internet? I understand both perspectives of the situatiion, and personally I do not download for the fear of getting in legal matters myself, but I do not feel strongly against those individuals who do download illegally.
ReplyDeleteI don't feel that information can be stolen or pirated. It is an amorphous organism that does not belong to a single individual; it is part of a universal fabric or text and cannot be contained within a single work or any other arbitrary container.
ReplyDeleteInformation starts with one person. If it is original, they own that information. For what is that information being provided? In the academic world, the use and reuse of information is closely monitored. Any information can be used as long as it is cited and the owner of that information is credited. The theft of creative work is much harder to control. Technology has made it so much easier to reproduce all kinds of art for free. But it has also made it easier for artists to create their own work and put it out to be heard. Bear in mind that the corporate world has been screwing artists for decades.
ReplyDeleteThe internet is not free. I pay for the internet service I use. I believe that anything I can access from the internet is free and should not be called theft.
ReplyDeleteI think the internet can be compared to a library. Both serve the same purpose, to provide information and entertainment. I do not pay to read a book, periodical, magazine etc.If I take a cd from the library and upload it to my itunes that is not considered piracy. Why should it be considered theft when it comes from the internet? A library and the internet function the same way and should be treated as such.
Where do you draw the line between freely appropriating information and calling it piracy or theft? How much or what kind of information is it okay to use?
ReplyDeleteIts hard to define a line between freely appropriating information on the internet and piracy/theft. Piracy and theft, is clearly harmful and should be stopped. But many people argue that they pay for internet, so they technically they are paying for what the use or take. Unfortunately it is still wrong. Therefore, I honestly cannot draw the line between the two.
Any kind of information is used and can be used, regardless if it free or not. Moreover, if its "free" people assume its okay to use and in some cases it is. But not everything is free, therefore making it not okay to use.