Copyright theft - a scumbag amongst us.

Discussion in 'Video Cameras' started by, Sep 28, 2006.

  1. Guest

    Jerry in your world of black and white tell me something.

    When you posted text you 'stole' from creativecow regarding the new
    version of Vegas, did you ask for their permission to do so before you
    did it?

    I'd suggest that you didn't, and I'd suggest they probably would care
    either, but under YOUR terms of reference you are a scumbag thief. You
    took advertising revenue from the mouths of the owners of creative cow
    by posting information STOLEN from their website without their
    permission. The fact that you also posted a link to the website is
    immaterial. It's tantamount to me lifting 90% of a DVD and posting it
    on a website and then putting a link in to the studio. Wouldn't matter
    if it was a single frame would it? You SHOULD have just posted the
    heading "New Version of Vegas' and then posted the link to creativecow.

    Under your own terms that makes you a scumbag copyright thief.

    Argue your case with logic Jerry...tell me how you are NOT a scumbag
    copyright thief. Please explain to us all how what you did under your
    own terms of reference is any different to lifting 10 second segments
    from content someone already actually owns.

    I bet my left nut that you won't. That you will accuse me of trolling,
    hurl a few expletives but conveniently dodge the question.
, Sep 28, 2006
    1. Advertisements


    Jerry Guest

    You really are ignorant [1], go read the copyright laws, what I
    posted is allowed under both the 'Fair Use' and 'Review' clauses (it
    was correctly attributed) - now if I had reposted the whole article,
    like some would have done, that would indeed have been illegal. Also
    if you had bothered to check your facts you would have noticed that
    most of the Creative Cow article was nothing more that a Sony press
    release, by their very nature meant to be copied and quoted!

    [1] used in the true meaning of the word

    Go castrate yourself!
    Jerry, Sep 28, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. Guest

    Ok Jerry....You're right. It's quite clear that you can publish the

    I should have thought twice dualing with someone as anal about
    everything copyright and well not just copyright - just everything.

    Still I'm not a stickler for copyright. If I like software I buy it,
    but mostly I don't. I don't subscribe to the notion that it's theft.
    I've never paid for a version of photoshop/premiere/illustrator in my
    life, though I've insisted on them when I work for the companies i work

    I would NEVER pay that much for software, but because I know how to use
    them, other companies worried about copyright will. The side effect of
    piracy is increased profits for them. If everyone actually HAD to pay
    for software, cheaper software would be abundant and the companies like
    Adobe and wouldn't have the stranglehold they have.

    The same with all microsoft products...I have to say I do feel sorry
    for Bill Gates sometimes, the fact that I'm taking money from his and
    his shareholders accounts.

    I have estimated that if I had paid for all my software he would be
    worth somewhere in the 45,856,242,445 instead of the paltry
    45,856,241,986 he has today.

    If someone takes a copy of photoshop from the web and installs in and
    plays with it and produces no commercial value what harm is it to
    Adobe? If it was a technical impossibility to take software, it's not
    like everyone would go out and say 'Oh well...better cough up' - they'd
    just use the next best thing that's cheaper/free. They haven't
    physically lost anything aside from a sale they never would have had

    Companies HAVE to pay because of the legal implications, users that
    don't pay don't cost the software houses anything at all. The only
    impact they have is to create a better awareness of the product and
    therefore when a company needs to purchase a software package it's the
    one they insist on buying.

    I like to think of it as an extended trial period.
, Sep 29, 2006
  4. i.e. - Currently I can get away with stealing software.

    Fine. But spare us the sophistry.
    Laurence Payne, Sep 29, 2006
  5. Guest


    I presume you only believe it to be sophistry as you've ingested
    someone elses sophistry based on business and the construct of IP, .

    Is IP that black & white?

    Is there no difference in using photoshop to edit your own personal
    photos at home and using the package commerically for financial gain?

    It makes me laugh that companies like Microsoft have the gaul to
    lambast others about IP when so many of their best features have been
    stolen from Apple. Of course they do it in a way that makes it legal,
    but it's theft just the same not that Jerry would agree I'm sure. If
    the law says it's fine it must be fine.
, Sep 29, 2006

    Jerry Guest

    The difference is, I have my brains in my head, you seem to have them
    either in your arse or at the bottom of a booze bottle....
    Jerry, Sep 29, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.