Bill S.978

[Zarth]

there is a new bill looming around that is currently in its early stages. This bill, from the way its worded could end all production of lets play videos, or live streams video game feeds. the only reason im here today is to tell you guys this. this is going to be my only thread, im only here to spread the news about this bill before its too late.

even though its at its early stage you guys need to stand against it. watch this video, he can explain it better then I can.



the links to the bill are in his description for this video.

[destructin]

I'm pretty sure the bill will be heavily re-written.

And theres no doubt in my mind that with the fat cat corporations and even the MPAA (the guys who rate the movies, giving them G - R rating) the bill is gonna completely gonna get passed.

No more listening to music or watching movie clips on youtubez.

I'm against the bill anyway, I just always look at the negative side.

[Metal Chao]

Oh dear

[pm]

Murika

[Shackles]

What? They're taking away OUR RIGHT as human beings to stream copyrighted material on the internet without permission from it's owner? What will we do?!?!?

Seriously, if this helps in stopping people from stealing movies, music, and other material, then I couldn't give less of a shit if videogames LP'ers go down as a side-effect.

[Kromax]

Jul 2, 2011 22:48:12 GMT -5 Shackles said:

What? They're taking away OUR RIGHT as human beings to stream copyrighted material on the internet without permission from it's owner? What will we do?!?!?

Seriously, if this helps in stopping people from stealing movies, music, and other material, then I couldn't give less of a shit if videogames LP'ers go down as a side-effect.

You realize it's not gonna stop piracy anymore than the current laws in place, right? The only thing this is gonna do is make people pay money to simply upload video of video game content.

[Metal Chao]

Jul 3, 2011 4:37:10 GMT -5 Kromax said:

Jul 2, 2011 22:48:12 GMT -5 Shackles said:

What? They're taking away OUR RIGHT as human beings to stream copyrighted material on the internet without permission from it's owner? What will we do?!?!?

Seriously, if this helps in stopping people from stealing movies, music, and other material, then I couldn't give less of a shit if videogames LP'ers go down as a side-effect.

You realize it's not gonna stop piracy anymore than the current laws in place, right? The only thing this is gonna do is make people pay money to simply upload video of video game content.

And making murder illegal doesn't stop people from murdering people either, but it's still a good idea.
The point of banning things isn't necessarily to stop them doing it but so that they can be legally punished if they do do it.

[Kromax]

Jul 3, 2011 9:33:21 GMT -5 Metal Chao said:

Jul 3, 2011 4:37:10 GMT -5 Kromax said:

You realize it's not gonna stop piracy anymore than the current laws in place, right? The only thing this is gonna do is make people pay money to simply upload video of video game content.

And making murder illegal doesn't stop people from murdering people either, but it's still a good idea.
The point of banning things isn't necessarily to stop them doing it but so that they can be legally punished if they do do it.

Are you really comparing doing a Let's Play to homicide?

[destructin]

Yeah Metal, you're right, but comparing murder with video game footage is way out of proportions.

[Gront]

Actually, in this case, Metal's argument is more effective because he used something people are less likely to do if discouraged as an example. Take a course in logic, guys.

[Kromax]

You kinda killed the effectiveness, though, since you explained it, then again, it didn't really feel effective to me anyways.

[Gront]

Kromax, neither logic nor metaphors are like jokes; they're not ruined by explanation.

[Kromax]

If you tell someone that someone said something for the sake of making one problem seem bigger than it is, do you think that they'll still take the problem as seriously?

[Gront]

Okay, my train of thought was a bit muddled in there (and I'll be honest, I'm not 100% sure what I was saying), but basically Metal isn't commiting a logical fallacy by comparing murder to streaming things off the internet in this particular case due to the nature of a leagal offense. In short, a wrong is a wrong, and if the government deems something wrong, they should not refrain from enforcing it simply because the law will not be 100% effective.

[charlie]

Jul 6, 2011 4:11:33 GMT -5 Gront said:

Kromax, neither logic nor metaphors are like jokes; they're not ruined by explanation.

but grent that's more like scare tactics anyway. you're just saying uploading a video now is in the same boat as murder.

[destructin]

Jul 6, 2011 4:40:40 GMT -5 charlie said:

Jul 6, 2011 4:11:33 GMT -5 Gront said:

Kromax, neither logic nor metaphors are like jokes; they're not ruined by explanation.

but grent that's more like scare tactics anyway. you're just saying uploading a video now is in the same boat as murder.

Well, 5 years in jail isn't as bad as 25-Til' life or a death sentence, but 5 years in jail is very bad anyway.

[Gront]

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that if something is "bad" and should be illegal, the fact that a law will not be able to prevent all instances of the crime from occurring should not preclude the law coming into being. Replace "murder" with "theft" if it makes you more comfortable (because, from the company's standpoint, it pretty much is).

Don't get me wrong, I love Let's Play videos, but I don't really think this law will be the end of them, since I'd think most video game developers understand that watching someone play a game will only have a positive impact on sales. I doubt any of the video game companies (save perhaps EA because they're assholes) will press charges against LPers.

[Shackles]

Jul 3, 2011 9:33:21 GMT -5 Metal Chao said:

And making murder illegal doesn't stop people from murdering people either, but it's still a good idea.

Somehow, whenever someone does a comparison like that, I know a bunch of people are going to try to turn the argument on them like this:

Jul 6, 2011 3:03:35 GMT -5 Kromax said:

Are you really comparing doing a Let's Play to homicide?

Jul 6, 2011 3:12:41 GMT -5 destructin said:

Yeah Metal, you're right, but comparing murder with video game footage is way out of proportions.

Jul 6, 2011 4:40:40 GMT -5 charlie said:

you're just saying uploading a video now is in the same boat as murder.

And those are extremely dumb counter-arguments. It is the same fucking principle. Just because a law is not going to stop people from committing crimes doesn't mean the law should not be enforced. Metal is not trying to imply that "STREAMING COPYRIGHTED CONTENT = MURDER!!!1!", it's just that people need to make that comparison to put it in a way that you can understand, because apparently it's very fucking hard to grasp the concept.

Making it so streaming stolen material is punishable with fines and prison time would certainly make people more reluctant to do it. Just because it will not put a 100% stop to piracy doesn't mean it'd be a useless endeavor.

[Kromax]

Shackles, you don't put it in perspective by comparing it to murder, murder is an heinous crime with a large amount of social and moral issues, streaming content without copyright is something that, yes, isn't saintly, but it isn't fucking murder, you can't look at laws objectively with putting videos of you playing Minecraft on the internet on the same moral basis of killing someone.

If you don't want to equate murder with streaming videos of a game, than don't make the comparison.

[Metal Chao]

Yes you do put it into perspective by comparing it to murder. Also to rape, kidnapping or any other kind of theft.
Nowhere in this topic has anyone said that these things are equally bad things to do and anyone who thinks that anyone is even implying that is a moron.
The comparison however is still completely valid and in no way a fallacy, you're just too oblivious to understand how.

These are all things that people might want to do. You might want to kill someone because you really dislike them. You might want to rape someone because you want to have sex with them but they don't return your feelings. You might want to steal something because you want it a lot but can't or won't pay for it.
These are all also things that the simple fact that they are illegal is often not enough to stop people actually doing it. If you hate someone enough and are angry enough you might still kill them, if you want something enough you may well still steal it.
The law exists not only because the fact that it is illegal is a detterent (making murder illegal probably makes people a little less likely to do it even if they are very angry) but also gives the courts the ability to punish people for doing it.

In this way, it is the same as piracy. Piracy is something that a lot of people will do despite knowing it is illegal. Some people will be turned off from doing it by the fact that it is illegal, but many still will not. Making it illegal makes it a punishable offence to commit piracy, while not making it illegal means that these people can just get off from stealing something scott free. In this way it is like any other crime like murder, rape or any other kind of theft because while the illegality itself is a detterent the bigger deterrent is the fact that you get punished if you are caught doing it (and if you are caught doing it you will get punished, meaning that you are likely not to do it again).

Nobody ever said the crime was equal in moral value to murder, murder is generally considered to be something far worse than piracy. What people said (specifically me) was that it was equal in the means and reasons by which it is illegal.
You are putting words in my mouth, I am not sure if you are aware that you are doing it but you are and it is making you look very very silly because you are making multiple posts arguing against a person who does not exist.

Have I put this in simple enough words for you to understand now Kromax? This has now been explained to you five times and you are yet to stop repeating the complete garbage you said in response to it the first time.
If not, please leave this topic for now and come back when you have learned how both debate and the english language work. If someone tells you multiple times that you have misinterpreted their words then it is incredibly, mind-bogglingly stupid to ignore them and act as if their original statement still means what you mistakenly thought it did.

[Candy Biu]

Jul 6, 2011 6:24:53 GMT -5 Metal Chao said:

Making it illegal makes it a punishable offence to commit piracy, while not making it illegal means that these people can just get off from stealing something scott free.

Piracy is not stealing.

[Metal Chao]

Jul 6, 2011 20:36:42 GMT -5 Candy Biu said:

Jul 6, 2011 6:24:53 GMT -5 Metal Chao said:

Making it illegal makes it a punishable offence to commit piracy, while not making it illegal means that these people can just get off from stealing something scott free.

Piracy is not stealing.

What would you call owning something that usually requires you to pay for free without the creator's permission then?

[Spudmeister]

Jul 6, 2011 20:56:17 GMT -5 Metal Chao said:

Jul 6, 2011 20:36:42 GMT -5 Candy Biu said:

Piracy is not stealing.

What would you call owning something that usually requires you to pay for free without the creator's permission then?

Borrowing.

[Metal Chao]

Personally I'd ask for someone's permission before borrowing their stuff, I'm pretty sure borrowing someone's stuff without asking could get you charged with theft if they got mad about it.

But fine, if you want to be that pedantic:
What would you call owning something that usually requires you to pay for free without the creator's permission and with no intention of returning it, then?[/quote]

[Candy Biu]

Jul 6, 2011 20:56:17 GMT -5 Metal Chao said:

Jul 6, 2011 20:36:42 GMT -5 Candy Biu said:

Piracy is not stealing.

What would you call owning something that usually requires you to pay for free without the creator's permission then?

Copying.

I saw an image a while ago that explains it better than my memory every can, but the basic gist of it is:
Stealing means that there is a physical copy that is taken illegally, and no one else may then access that copy.
Piracy, on the other hand, is the copying and sharing of the data. There is no copy illegally taken that can't be accessed by someone else.

Maybe it was an interview with Notch....

[DaringVonContra]

This bill will NOT end Lets Plays in any way, shape, or form. The Bill has been directed at Movies, TV and Music. Unlike those industrys where people can just watch the entire movie and have already experienced the movies. Lets Plays allow users to see what a game is like before buying it, as video games can offer varying experiences. Its basically free advertising. Video game companys WILL be able to release a statement allowing people to use their content. Even some companys are already taking advantage of their footage themselves. An example would be Valve and the Tf2 replay system. So dont get your panties in a bunch about this. Unless you like to post movies and music videos on youtube you wont have to worry about anything.

[Spudmeister]

But youtube is where I listen to most of my music. :'C

I swear to god if I have to start listening to VEVO videos...

[charlie]

Jul 6, 2011 22:51:29 GMT -5 DaringVonContra said:

This bill will NOT end Lets Plays in any way, shape, or form. The Bill has been directed at Movies, TV and Music. Unlike those industrys where people can just watch the entire movie and have already experienced the movies. Lets Plays allow users to see what a game is like before buying it, as video games can offer varying experiences. Its basically free advertising. Video game companys WILL be able to release a statement allowing people to use their content. Even some companys are already taking advantage of their footage themselves. An example would be Valve and the Tf2 replay system. So dont get your panties in a bunch about this. Unless you like to post movies and music videos on youtube you wont have to worry about anything.

the bill is very general about it. but it does apply to videogames ken. it applies to any copyright material being streamed or shared on the internet. posting a scene from a movie onto youtube is considered "free advertising" as well isn't it? well it's still illegal and studios still remove their content from the site.

[Gront]

Jul 7, 2011 0:10:16 GMT -5 charlie said:

posting a scene from a movie onto youtube is considered "free advertising" as well isn't it? well it's still illegal and studios still remove their content from the site.

There's a huge difference between seeing part of a movie and watching someone play part of a game. Games are inherently dependent upon user input, thus a game will (usually) be a different experience, even if the same player is playing it. Movies, on the other hand, are constant between views, and watching a scene that contains a major spoiler might just ruin the movie for someone such that they wouldn't purchase it, because if they were to purchase it, nothing would have changed.

That being said, it does, in fact, apply to video game streams, as they do contain copyrighted material.

[Metal Chao]

Jul 6, 2011 22:23:27 GMT -5 Candy Biu said:

Jul 6, 2011 20:56:17 GMT -5 Metal Chao said:

What would you call owning something that usually requires you to pay for free without the creator's permission then?

Copying.

I saw an image a while ago that explains it better than my memory every can, but the basic gist of it is:
Stealing means that there is a physical copy that is taken illegally, and no one else may then access that copy.
Piracy, on the other hand, is the copying and sharing of the data. There is no copy illegally taken that can't be accessed by someone else.

Maybe it was an interview with Notch....

So if I took one of your brawl characters and started using it for myself, there'd be no problem there?
You'd still be able to use it too. You wouldn't have lost anything.
And if that's still not ok... how is illegaly downloading a movie any different? The creators still lose profit because you are using a paid service without paying for it, just as you would have lost time because I just took your idea so I didn't have to bother making my own.

What if you made a piece of artwork that people were prepared to buy for money? I came up to it and just took a photograph. You've still got your artwork, I just don't have to pay for it.
Oh and then I could start printing off my own copies and selling them for slightly less, or just give them away free to my friends. That would be fine though, apparently, because you still have your original copy.

You are taking something that belongs to someone else without their permission, fully knowing that if you asked permission they would say no. You are depriving people that worked hard on a project money. It is easy to think of corporations as big faceless machines and then forget that hundreds of real people actually work for them and actually need their wages.

You are not literally taking an actual physical object away from someone, but you are taking actual physical money out of the hands of actual real physical people.
What do you call it when people takes your money away from you? Stealing.

Stealing money from an online bank would still be stealing, regardless of the fact that they can just list as much cash as they want on their website because it's just a variable in a database.
Going into a bookstore, physically copying every word from every page of a book onto a notepad and then leaving without buying said book because I have just written down all the content would be stealing even though they still have the original book.
If I take someone's idea, they still have it. It's still stealing.

If someone takes your credit card number, you still have that number. But they still stole it and now have access to all of your money, they are simply using the number as you would be using the games or movies that you have stolen.
But apparently taking money away from people is fine as long as you don't steal any actual physical objects, so you wouldn't mind!

How can you possibly say that is a moral thing to do, even if it's not the dictionary definition of stealing (which, by the way, is something I dispute. No dictionary I have checked has made any distinction that theft must take a physical object away to count as theft. Both of them are still stealing, according to the dictionary).