[sq_]

Attempts at this type of legislation make me almost irrationally angry.

This is a quote from the article that the PIA post linked to (translated from Swedish by Google so wording may be slightly off):

"Today there is an organized online piracy that has major consequences for the whole community. Therefore, it is good that the punishment crimes for these crimes have been overlooked as the sanction is proportional to the seriousness of the crime"

I just fail to understand how someone causing a multi-million/billion dollar media corporation to lose some money is a crime so serious that that person should be imprisoned for up to six years.

[kobrad]

Are we still saying piracy loses money for somebody? Even after the EU paper about it?

Why is it so hard to believe research?

https://juliareda.eu/2017/09/secret-copyright-infringement-s...

[speedplane]

You cite a single article, which goes against the past two decades of experience, where illegal downloads have decimated much of the entire music industry.

[Mediterraneo10]

When were these “two decades”? Illegal downloads in Western Europe and North America only flourished on a large scale for a decade or so, between the rise of Napster and the point when it began to feel more convenient to many people to pay on iTunes, use a streaming service, or just hear whatever you want to listen to free on YouTube. The traditional music industry was challenged by filesharing, but it has also been decimated by changing formats that diminish the importance of the whole album, and a glut of content where it’s hard to do promotion when you’re just a drop in the ocean.

People who torrent music – I am still one myself – can be passionate about it, but we are a shrinking minority.

[pvaldes]

Last month I bought another external harddisk as a second security copy for my photos (can sound like a cliche, but this was their sole purpose). They say me that I have to pay around 8 euro extra, because I could be a pirate. So I had been fined by a private company, not related with the maker of the hardware and with the complicity of the government. Not much different than if bankers would push and force the government to make everybody serve three months in jail; because "everybody could be a bank robber".

Law is based in the norm that you can't pay two times for the same crime. I had paid yet "for copying a few titles". I pay each time I buy a computer, a telephone or an SD target, so I feel morally vindicated to take a modest profit of my pre-crime also.

[KozmoNau7]

The music industry decimated itself, by being stuck in their backwards ways. They stagnated instead of innovating, and ignored the vast array of new technologies that became available to them.

They shunned digital distribution and preferred to bet on ill-conceived retrofitted DRM on CDs. They attempted to instigate a migration to new DRM-laden formats (DVD-A and SACD) with false claims of better sound quality. They completely neglected streaming possibilities until Spotify et al. came and caught them with their pants down. Now they are trying to milk the streaming companies as hard as they possibly can, killing their Golden Goose in the process.

They are seeing record profits from streaming, but they continue to tighten the leash.

[bornonline1]

Music had physical copies. But with the internet, all physicality was lost. That's what cost the decimation.

[scrumption]

lmao, you sure know what you're talking about, the music industry is just in tatters these days huh

[speedplane]

Have you compared it today with what it was circa 1995? Yes, it is in tatters.

[scrumption]

look, i get that you've gotten yourself into a career where you're adjacent to the legal system so you have no ability to critically evaluate anything beyond "it is/isn't legal therefore it is/isn't good" but if you try talking to a young person you might realize the number of independent artists has been exploding every year for a decade and we now have more people creating quality music than ever before in the history of the world (more people per capita than ever before as well, I'd wager). the ability to share and expose others to these new artists faster and easier than ever before is what makes this possible. sorry that no one cares that the big record labels and top 40s that made all their money on CDs are losing ground to distribution methods that aren't utterly unable to adapt to the industry's current landscape

[speedplane]

"we now have more people creating quality music than ever before in the history of the world"

Where exactly are you getting this? I find it extremely unlikely, and I'd bet the opposite. Just because it's now easier to discover artists, does not mean that there are more of them. My position is based on the many former artists I know who abandoned what they did b/c of the futility of being able to support themselves.

But the issue is bigger than just creating the most amount of art. On a moral level, an artist should have some ability to control how their art is distributed. Just because it can be easy or free for others to enjoy it doesn't mean that everyone is entitled to it.

[PeterisP]

If my neighborhood has a rapist, someone who lives off of burglaries, or someone who habitually drives drunk, then that has major consequences for the community and requires serious attention.

If my neighborhood has someone sharing pirated media, it simply does not have major consequences for the community.

[Pica_soO]

Imagine- you leave a USB-Stick lying on somebodys desk- that USB-Stick contains pirated software.

The person picks up that USB-Stick and keeps that USB-Stick- and just for this - setup you are clearly in the right to get him in for half a century.

Also, does this mean that you can get GPL-Infringers for six years sentenced?

I wonder if those taking the Lobbsters money here think there creation so ridiculous that it be repealed in an instant.