Would You Squeal?

[Baron Kurtz]

Now, a question: If I own a vinyl copy of Song X that I have purchased in a store, I do indeed own the right to personally enjoy that piece of music. Is it OK then, to seek a digital copy of the very same Song X, to re-enable enjoyment of it due the the stranding of the original format? If I've got no turntable, I can no longer enjoy Song X, so can I grab a replacement digital copy, or must I renew my ownership of Song X each time a new delivery format is invented? Must I buy eight copies of Song X in different formats?

I think, Scott, that you have the right to make a copy for yourself. I looked into the issue for some of my records, which have never been released on CD. In order to stop destroying the vinyl i recorded them onto my Mac. I have never distributed them, though. I think distribution is where the law comes into play, but no copyright lawyer, I.

Most stuff, this is not an issue. Most things are available in digital format. But some are not.

bk

 

[Bebop]

I understand your point but...I just don't think that attacking the little guy is going to solve any problems. Fining hurts the person who can't defend themselves well enough--think about all the high-and-mightys who were able to hire very expensive, very sharp lawyers to get off the hook.

Confronting the "little guy" is what helps the most. If you get rid of "the little guy" you nip it in the bud. Most people that do that kind of petty theft don't really have an idea how it affects anyone and fines may or may not mean anything to the little guy but getting confronted by members of their society may leave a bigger impact.

I know that the one time I was caught shoplifting when I was about 10 yrs. old was the last time I did it because I was humbled by the customer that caught me and did not turn me in.

 

[Bebop]

Yeah I'd alert the theatre personnel and let them handle it from there.

...and that is the way to handle things like that. It would be silly to play cop and confront the person physically. I would think my job as a member of society is to alert the authorities, not take matters into my own hands.

Then again, talk is cheap. I caught a purse snatcher and chased him in my car until I caught him. The court room was full of gang members that made me feel very uncomfortable but looking at the lady who had her purse snatched with a broken arm because of the incident, made it all worthwhile although I don't know if I would give chase ever again. [huh]

Squealing sounds like a black and white issue on the surface but when you break it down, there is a lot to consider. [huh]

 

[Martinis at 8]

Confronting the "little guy" is what helps the most. If you get rid of "the little guy" you nip it in the bud. Most people that do that kind of petty theft don't really have an idea how it affects anyone and fines may or may not mean anything to the little guy but getting confronted by members of their society may leave a bigger impact...

This is a proven fact. In fact there's more to it than just what Bebop has stated above. It brings down the big fish also. I call it the "Giuliani Effect". Not to get into politics, but the way NYC was cleaned up was actually by going after the little guy. You catch that graffiti writer and pretty soon he tells you who did that unsolved murder, the murderer than tells you who the drug supplier was, etc. The dominoes start falling, and the trail starts with that little punk on the street.

M8

 

[cowboy76]

I keep reading the fear-laiden responses to confronting people who are shoplifting, or possibly even mugging someone.
I see references to gangs and kids with guns, etc.

The reason kids and adults keep getting away with such crimes is BECAUSE of the fear that is in people, like that which is in this thread,...the "dont go after them, you'll get hurt, dont confront a kid, he may pull a gun!..." and so on. Folks, we have just fed directly into another huge problem with society! We keep wanting it different and better and for this kind of thing to stop, but instead of doing something about it, we just let it go and let someone ELSE do something about it! That's rediculous!
Its not about being macho, its not about being a hero, its about having the decnency and morals to ACT and DO something about what's happeneing and not just turn tail and run.

Want to pull a gun on me, fine, I have a permit to carry and defend myself and I'd have no problem doing so. Its my human right to defend myself by any means possible when my life is threatened, not to mention my Constitutional right.
I am by no means saying to go and look for trouble, that's just stupid, what I AM saying, is that if you find yourself a witness to a women being mugged, (or the like)what do you do, jump back so he doesnt see you, call 911 and HOPE the guy doesnt also kill the lady being mugged??
I say arm yourself for protection in what way you feel comfortable and get EDUCATED in doing so, FIRST AND FOREMOST! Then take a self defense class or two. If you choose to arm yourself, obtain a legal permit to carry, then go to a good reputable gun range and instructor if needed (**I actually frequent one in the city that also holds the State Police's training classes from time to time**) seek out the best, get educated first, (this is the most important thing to do!!!) and then obey the law from then on it.

I just cannot stand to hear such fine gentleman and women feel the fear they have for others,....its a shame. Be strong, educate yourself, and stand up for what you believe in!:eusa_clap Inside of every human being is the instinct to protect, no matter how much we try and stifle this basic animalistic instinct we have been created with.

Ask yourself, if you were on the recieving end of a mugging, etc. or any crime and you saw people just standing there or passing you and running away, what would you think in that moment? I for one would lay blame on them as I would lay blame on the criminal!

Life is to short and I just couldn't stand to see someone's life threatened and do nothing about it.

 

[Martinis at 8]

Well said! :eusa_clap

M8

 

[cowboy76]

Thank you.

 

[scotrace]

I disagree. If it were only me to think of, I'd jump the punk. But I have people who depend on me for their well-being, and an employer who counts on my contributions. To go John-Wayning myself into a dangerous situation, given my own circumstances wouldn't be bravery, it would be irresponsible and selfish.
And, that's what the law is for. If they take no action, then my responsibility is to take it up with the governing body that causes laws to be enforced.

I have nothing against any person who chooses to "get involved" in a direct way that puts themselves in physical danger - in fact I respect it. But I think it's a little over-generalizing to say that those who do not choose to do so are endemic of the general failure of society to care, or the increasing fear of the populace.

Of course, if I saw someone being harmed, I would take action, as would 99% of the gentlemen here, I'm sure.

 

[BegintheBeguine]

I'm a pig.

I would squeal, even without a reward. I have squealed at concerts. Hey, buy the artist's product, for pity's sake, or stay home and make your own movies and music. Support the writer's strike while you're at it. Makes me mad, all the hard-working performers I have known who get ripped off.

 

[Martinis at 8]

I disagree. If it were only me to think of, I'd jump the punk. But I have people who depend on me for their well-being...

This is actually important. It's part of the risk assessment we all have to contend with in our everyday lives.

M8

 

[Gary Crumrine]

I don't think I'd get involved. It seems to me that we've developed into a society structured so the good guys lose. You see something wrong. You intervene. The punk sues you, and significant family money must be spent in defense. Or the punk may charge you with (fill in the blank), and the police treat the assertion seriously. Once again, serious family money goes to the defense lawyers. I recognize that my "avoid confrontation unless it is directed against you or your family" approach, if adopted by others, could be misunderstood as supporting continuing civil decay, but judge that the rot has already set in. Neither you nor I are sufficient to stop it, I'm afraid.

 

[Mike in Seattle]

I understand your point but...I just don't think that attacking the little guy is going to solve any problems. Fining hurts the person who can't defend themselves well enough--think about all the high-and-mightys who were able to hire very expensive, very sharp lawyers to get off the hook. Stopping individual bootleggers will do nothing to stem the trend, because they aren't high profile enough. What is needed is not the band-aid solution of snitching on the perpetrator. It's finding out why it's rampant, and doing a larger, wider spreading action. It may be impossible, but this current idea of tattling is not going to help either. I'm not condoning the action, per se, but I can't find a good enough reason to snitch on someone for bootlegging.

And with Jammie Thomas, the industry never lost any money. The people who took advantage of her downloads would have found someone else to gain the songs from, and the industry wouldn't have any extra sales to begin with. So fining her $220,000 is unfair. It's money they wouldn't have, period, regardless of the illegal downloads.

*I want to make sure that I'm not offending anyone in particular--this is a topic that hits close to home, as I have family in the music industry who share my opinions. It's a common topic of discussion, and I'm just making points that I've gathered, not trying to stir anything up.

So at what point do you think theft should be prosecuted? Is it OK as long as it's some faceless company? Is it OK to steal just one 99 cent song from iTunes, or should we only prosecute at 10? 100? 1000 songs? Or should it only be prosecuted when it affects you personally? Someone steals your car or television...why should society bother to prosecute them because, you know, we can't or shouldn't stop people from thieving by prosecuting them. It's just going to happen, right? We just need to get over it and move on. Just go buy another car, TV, silver tea service similar to the family heirloom passed down from great-great-grandma that some scumbag stole...

Fines - Fines are meant as a punishment. You don't want to pay the fine, don't pirate songs or whatever the fines are levied in relation to.

Stopping individual bootleggers does nothing to stem the trend - as more and more are prosecuted and fined, people are going to start thinking twice.

The industry never lost any money? Certainly it did. And it's not just "the industry" - there are performers and songwriters and lyrists out there losing royalties every time a song or movie or other copyrighted material is pirated. As people here on the board have pointed out, they've personally lost income due to piracy of their works. With Jammie Thomas and her ilk, hundreds of thousands if not millions of users have songs they should have paid for because she posted them illegally. And those lost revenues mean the companies need to raise prices to cover those losses.

 

[Bebop]

If you tack on the fact that movie bootleggers do such a horrible job and you never get what the movie maker meant to give you, you have even more reason to prosecute. That in itself should be prosecuted. Bad bootlegging! lol

 

[sweetfrancaise]

So at what point do you think theft should be prosecuted? Is it OK as long as it's some faceless company? Is it OK to steal just one 99 cent song from iTunes, or should we only prosecute at 10? 100? 1000 songs? Or should it only be prosecuted when it affects you personally? Someone steals your car or television...why should society bother to prosecute them because, you know, we can't or shouldn't stop people from thieving by prosecuting them. It's just going to happen, right? We just need to get over it and move on. Just go buy another car, TV, silver tea service similar to the family heirloom passed down from great-great-grandma that some scumbag stole...

Fines - Fines are meant as a punishment. You don't want to pay the fine, don't pirate songs or whatever the fines are levied in relation to.

Stopping individual bootleggers does nothing to stem the trend - as more and more are prosecuted and fined, people are going to start thinking twice.

The industry never lost any money? Certainly it did. And it's not just "the industry" - there are performers and songwriters and lyrists out there losing royalties every time a song or movie or other copyrighted material is pirated. As people here on the board have pointed out, they've personally lost income due to piracy of their works. With Jammie Thomas and her ilk, hundreds of thousands if not millions of users have songs they should have paid for because she posted them illegally. And those lost revenues mean the companies need to raise prices to cover those losses.

Okay, to be fair, we are approaching this issue from two different angles. I understand that the value of property rights is infringed here--that's not what I'm trying to debate. The accepted definition of stealing* includes the bootlegging that is rampant in the entertainment industry, and I understand that this is a problem.

However, I don't think that a solution lies in tagging the person sitting next to me for filming the movie I'm watching. Okay, it's wrong, s/he's stealing creative property that's not hers/his. But there will always be someone to replace the person who was scared away from the practice by a hefty fine or jail time.

So how to resolve it? The industry cannot focus on the problem from such a narrow lens. [huh] Creatives do need compensation for their work (look at the Writer's strike and the stagehands on Broadway)--what kind of a society would we be if we didn't reward the act of creation and thought? But much of art (music, theatre, film--but not all, by any means) is now a corporate industry, not art for art's sake.

Hypothetically, the people who share music files wouldn't purchase the music in the first place, if there is a way to get around the system. So the companies did not lose revenue--it was never there to begin with. If anything, the sharing of music helps to spread the popularity of a band--same with movies. If I liked a movie well enough, I woudn't be happy with a bootlegged copy in the first place (I've seen bootlegged movies at a friend's house once or twice, but I've always been too distracted by the poor quality to enjoy the movie), and would go out and purchase it, or go to the theatres. Same with music--if I hear a song I really like, I'll go and buy the whole album, instead of borrowing it from a friend. When there is evident quality, it pays to purchase the real thing.

I hope this clarifies my position somewhat--I don't think that theft is ethically right, especially in a creative medium, but the biggest perpetrators are corporations.

*I state it this way because the value of property rights, and the idea of theft, is largely subjective.

 

[sweetfrancaise]

If you tack on the fact that movie bootleggers do such a horrible job and you never get what the movie maker meant to give you, you have even more reason to prosecute. That in itself should be prosecuted. Bad bootlegging! lol

lol I do agree with that! It's like seeing a poorly copied Mucha for sale. *shudder* lol

 

[Viola]

I keep reading the fear-laiden responses to confronting people who are shoplifting, or possibly even mugging someone.
I see references to gangs and kids with guns, etc.

The reason kids and adults keep getting away with such crimes is BECAUSE of the fear that is in people, like that which is in this thread,...the "dont go after them, you'll get hurt, dont confront a kid, he may pull a gun!..." and so on. Folks, we have just fed directly into another huge problem with society! We keep wanting it different and better and for this kind of thing to stop, but instead of doing something about it, we just let it go and let someone ELSE do something about it! That's rediculous!
Its not about being macho, its not about being a hero, its about having the decnency and morals to ACT and DO something about what's happeneing and not just turn tail and run.

I'm not going to win a fistfight with pretty much anybody. I will throw myself in harm's way for somebody's safety but I am not going to get stomped for somebody I don't know's stuff. I'm especially not going to get possibly badly jacked up for the sanctity of Walmart's merchandise.

Threaten somebody? I'll do something. Jump the turn-stile on the subway? Not so much, sorry.

 

[cowboy76]

Neither you nor I are sufficient to stop it, I'm afraid.

Its this exact thinking that just perpetuates the problem,....one person CAN and DOES make a difference!! If no one steps up to the plate then we loose the game,....people need to get more of a backbone!!

If you dont stand for something, you'll fall for anything!

 

[Edward]

I will throw myself in harm's way for somebody's safety but I am not going to get stomped for somebody I don't know's stuff. I'm especially not going to get possibly badly jacked up for the sanctity of Walmart's merchandise.

That's about the size of it. Somebody waves a gun or a knife and demands my wallet - they can have it. (Naturally, I'll be observing all the while and making a direct call to thep olice soon as they're clear). My wallet ain't worth getting stabbed over. Same if somebody breaks into my home: ultimately, it's only a TV / computer/ whatever - it's not worth either being injured over or even causing injury to someone else over a TV, IMO. Without gonig onto the politics of it, given the very different laws on gun ownership here in the UK as opposed to the US situation under the Second Amendment, arming yourself is generally not an option. Tends to be then that only criminals have the guns, though on the flipside they can be prosecuted for having them rather than only when they actually use them.

 

[killertomata]

It would entirely depend on the situation. When I was a child I saw a woman shoplifting baby formula and plastic bottle liners. I remember telling my mom later and she said it doesn't matter why someone is stealing, it's still wrong... but if I saw that today I'd probably let it go, because I kept thinking... she only took what would feed her child, I don't know her circumstances, and people in need fall through the cracks all the time.

However, I was in retail for sixteen years and it's the shoplifters that keep me from going back into retail management. I loathe them. So if it's people who are clearly professional shoplifters or kids being stupid, yeah I'll squeal to the nearest security personell. But if I see someone stealing food for their kids? I'd have to make the decision at that moment based on whatever I was seeing.

 

[PA Dancer]

I'm looking at a new poster the Motion Picture Association of America has sent out to all theatres in the US, offering a reward of up to $500 to any theatre employee who catches someone in the act of making a bootleg recording of any film being shown, and it makes me wonder -- in this day and age, how many people are willing to put themselves on the side of Established Authority and take action against an illegal act that most people might think of as petty and insignificant. With the whole "Stop Squealing" attitude rampant among the kids today, are we grownups really any more ethical?

I'd think this might make for an interesting discussion -- in such a situation, where you see someone committing an obvious smalltime crime, would *you* squeal or would you simply look the other way?

Me, if I catch someone taping, bam -- into the jug they go. That's no dilemma for me at all -- they're stealing my livelihood. But if I see some kid shoplifting at the mall? I'm honestly not sure what I'd do.

I leave things to Karma. I wouldn't report to authorities about the small-time crime person. Not for 500 bucks...but I may say something to the person themselves and leave it at that.