Isn't Filesharing A Socialist Activity?

[MagicNakor]

It's only Vivi because there isn't a picture of Nakor anywhere.

[OlderThanDirt]

echidna wrote:

the file sharing community, by circumventing the publishers distribution rights, are collectivising data product ownership.

Bull. Read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution. This is the first mention of rights for creators and innovators. It was meant to be a "limited time" right. And it was meant to a right "exclusive" to the creator/innovator. The Copyright Act of 1789/1790 was the last Constitutional copyright act. Subsequent copyright acts violated both the "limited time" and "exclusivity" mandates and are therefore unconstitutional. They just haven't been challenged as such ... yet.

And regarding "collectivising data product ownership," our Founding Fathers had a phrase for it -- the public domain. Organizations like Public Knowledge and the Electronic Frontier Foundation are fighting right now to both preserve the public domain rights (yes rights) we still have and restore those that have been taken away.

And file-sharers individually? They are performing acts of civil disobedience ... a time-honored tradition from Henry David Thoreau on down to Martin Luther King, Jr. (and beyond). And if you're wondering why the Founding Fathers demanded both "limited time" rights and "exclusivity," research England's 18th Century law called the "Statute of Anne" ... and why that law became necessary. You'll discover that this country's founders feared the creation of rights kingdoms (estates, companies or corporations, licenseers) like what we now see today in the RIAA, the top-5 media cartel, and "corporate cops" who seek the power to do dirty work without legal mandate to do so.

[echidna]

Originally posted by Switeck@19 May 2003 - 18:32

Anarchy is anti-government/NO-government, lawlessness, and/or disorder/chaos.
Filesharing does NOT seek to destroy governments -- it doesn't blow up buildings, it isn't terrorism, it almost can't be used to make money (to fund illegal activities -- with exception of Kazaa Gold ), and it can't even 'reach' people who don't go reaching for it.

Your understanding of anarchy is wrong
it develped in the late 19th & early 20th centuries as a serious political philosophy
you historical knowledge is incomplete you should research the real anarchists and the situationist international

[Allende1973]

Where all industries are owned by the government and goods are given out by the government rather than sold is communism.

I think we are talking about different things. 'True' communist ideals have little to do with the experience of the USSR or China, where one elite simply replaced another.
Anarchists are not proposing simply disorder, but rather a exsistence where controlling influences- government, church, armies, industry, etc- are no longer of relevence. This becomes possible with society organised into local communes with no central control.
Oh, and we don't need to physically burn CD's to destroy them. Every item I burn is one less I would have had to buy.

[Switeck]

Originally posted by echidna+19 May 2003 - 10:52--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (echidna @ 19 May 2003 - 10:52)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Switeck@19 May 2003 - 18:32

Anarchy is anti-government/NO-government, lawlessness, and/or disorder/chaos.
Filesharing does NOT seek to destroy governments -- it doesn&#39;t blow up buildings, it isn&#39;t terrorism, it almost can&#39;t be used to make money (to fund illegal activities -- with exception of Kazaa Gold ), and it can&#39;t even &#39;reach&#39; people who don&#39;t go reaching for it.

Your understanding of anarchy is wrong
it develped in the late 19th & early 20th centuries as a serious political philosophy
you historical knowledge is incomplete you should research the real anarchists and the situationist international[/b]

Are you saying that anarchism is NOT anti-government/no government or the other part (lawlessness and/or disorder/chaos)?

If my understanding of anarchy is wrong, does that mean that filesharing is TRYING to destroy governments -- by blowing up buildings, funding terrorism, and influencing people through its subversive messages?
<!--QuoteBegin--Allende1973@19 May 2003 - 13:00

Where all industries are owned by the government and goods are given out by the government rather than sold is communism.

I think we are talking about different things. &#39;True&#39; communist ideals have little to do with the experience of the USSR or China, where one elite simply replaced another.
Anarchists are not proposing simply disorder, but rather a exsistence where controlling influences- government, church, armies, industry, etc- are no longer of relevence. This becomes possible with society organised into local communes with no central control.
Oh, and we don&#39;t need to physically burn CD&#39;s to destroy them. Every item I burn is one less I would have had to buy.[/quote]Sorry, I meant "communism" as it has been practiced on large-scale...

"True" communism is an ideal the same way true capitalism, true socialism, and true anarachism is. Add REAL people to the equation, and none of those happen.

And every time you copy a CD instead of buying it, you are not only NOT destroying the original -- you are in fact ENLARGING the supply... the very opposite of destroying it&#33; Now, there&#39;s 1 extra CD that someone ELSE could (but probably won&#39;t...) buy. The perceived demand, as seen by music stores, is decreased because sales versis inventory drops -- so the price should drop if it were close to a capitalistic economy. Also the price should drop for OLDER albums due to reduced demand caused by loss-of-interest, market saturation, and perceived value.

Are you saying we&#39;re &#39;peaceful anarchists and communists&#39; like Gandi and Martin Luther King Jr?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Switeck@19 May 2003 - 22:25

Are you saying we&#39;re &#39;peaceful anarchists and communists&#39; like Gandi and Martin Luther King Jr?

Are you saying that Gandhi and King were "peaceful anarchists and communists ?

[Allende1973]

And every time you copy a CD instead of buying it, you are not only NOT destroying the original -- you are in fact ENLARGING the supply... the very opposite of destroying it&#33; Now, there&#39;s 1 extra CD that someone ELSE could (but probably won&#39;t...) buy. The perceived demand, as seen by music stores, is decreased because sales versis inventory drops -- so the price should drop if it were close to a capitalistic economy. Also the price should drop for OLDER albums due to reduced demand caused by loss-of-interest, market saturation, and perceived value.

Sure, but by opting to share we are dropping out of the capitalistic economy. We are not trading, or seeking any kind of recompense. We are enlarging the supply of music/movies/whatever, but the amount of media that is actually purchased will drop and drop.
it&#39;s not a black economy because no one is making any money.

totally agree with what you said about people and Kazaa virus though

[Derezo]

Who told the OP that the socialist ideal is wrong?
They were sadly mistaken, I&#39;m afraid.
I live in a heavily democratic capitalist country (Canada).. but socialism isn&#39;t wrong.. it&#39;s just misused.
Sadly, it was thought up by humans.. greedy, blood thirsty humans.

Anyway, P2P is socialist.. as it is for the people. Nobody gains, but you must be working-class to use it sort of deal.
K-Lite doesn&#39;t get no money from me, personally... but I get thousands of dollars worth of software, music and movies.

If you think it&#39;s a capitalist ideal, you have no idea what you&#39;re talking about.

[nueromancer]

The reason most Americans are anti-socialist is directly related to the mis labelling of a small political party during the 30&#39;s and 40&#39;s. A group of people calling themselves the "National Socialists" started a wee skirmish that eventually involved America. Actual socialism or communism for that matter can not work. The carrot and stick is the only thing that will work when dealing with humans. Any liberal or socialist agenda only feeds the unwilling. Creating a society of overweight, unbearable whiners that... whoops. I think I had better stop there.

[mijj]

Originally posted by echidna@18 May 2003 - 16:42
the file sharing community, by circumventing the publishers distribution rights, are collectivising data product ownership.
...
is filesharing &#39;un-american&#39;?

"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country...corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war."
...President Abraham Lincoln


... ol&#39; Abe was worried about the prospect of dictatorship by corporations.

It looks like it&#39;s un-american not to fileshare.