The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

  • Hi Guest - Did you know?
    Hot Topics is a Safe for Work (SFW) forum.

Am I the only guy that doesn't see anything wrong with illegal downloading?

  • Thread starter Thread starter refujiunderground
  • Start date Start date
Do you remember the outcry a few months ago, when it appeared the new Instagram settings allowed the company to use any of the pictures people posted for commercial purposes? As one person pointed out, "Oh I see - when it's YOUR work that somebody is going to use without permission or financial compensation, THEN it's a problem."

Lex

Apples and pears, old boy. Instagram and FB are going to SELL your image or charge advertisers to use it. The average home entertainment pirate is not making money off his illegalities (sure some probably are, but that's another issue. I believe most countries have provisions and distinguish between possession of stolen goods vs selling of stolen goods).

Use my image for non-commercial purposes, I can handle. Making money off me unfairly... not cool. I believe in the olden days that was commonly referred to as slavery, and as such I believe it has been outlawed (almost) everywhere.

-d-
 
The word "Illegal" said it all. If you truly support something, pay for it. When you download somethng you didn't pay for "movies, games, music, porn" that's stealing period. How would you feel if someone downloaded something you make money off?
 
you are STEALING nothing ever . The word is COPYING . The whole point of shoplifting or theft is something must be taken nothing every is . Ever . The crime is infringing legal rights of an individual not removing an object . Not a single thing is ever reduced ever .

yeah that is bullshit :)
imagine this, you invented the telephone, i copy the idea (without consent) and get a patent and make profit out of it. did i not steal that idea?
now this, i made a movie, you copy a movie (without consent) and derive pleasure from watching it (which is analogous to profit). are you sure you haven't stolen it?
 
Let's criminalize youtube'ers who put songs on repeat cause they aint paying a single cent either.

If the artists made that upload, or have agreed with it, then obviously it is ok.
It's like, if i offer you a gift, you did not steal it from me, got it?
 
yeah that is bullshit :)
imagine this, you invented the telephone, i copy the idea (without consent) and get a patent and make profit out of it. did i not steal that idea?
now this, i made a movie, you copy a movie (without consent) and derive pleasure from watching it (which is analogous to profit). are you sure you haven't stolen it?

Actually, yes, he hasn't. The movie is intact, and anyone who wishes to purchase it is free to do so.


And before people start those absolutist rants about how it's illegal and that's that, maybe it is worth addressing the issue of movie companies being about ten years behind on the times. Piracy is not only a fact of life, it is virtually impossible to stop in the digital age. So instead of wasting resources fighting it, why not try to offer a better product than the one people are pirating?
 
Let me just throw in for consideration-- any well known song will have like, hundreds of postings of it on youtube. Many of them with individual users setting their own backdrop, scenery, video footage, fan tribute, or even just a blank screen with the lyrics in the video. None of those hits are going to the artist. So to me, the difference between "saving it for winamp" and "pulling up a youtube to listen to it", not paying money either way, is still paper thin.
 
And whilst it was definetely much better quality than what we had been using it didn't end up being cheaper, infact they cost way way way more to buy. The reason was there was no piracy, the industry had complete control over us and could charge what they liked, they took advantage and for a while the consumers were shit on.
I remermber, in the old days, even into the first few years of the piracy era, when movies first started coming out on VHS VideoTape, the going price for movies was $79.99 to $99.99 EACH. That didn't exactly encourage anybody to buy the product legally, did it?

That also helped to set, in stone, the mindset that piracy was cool. Perhaps if the studios had started selling movies for something similar to two or three times the price of a ticket to the cinema, more people would have paid for ownership. Video tape itself was quite expensive in these early days, so going cheap like $5 or $10 per movie wasn't an option, yet.

I remember listening to William Hung. He was bangin
Was William Hung, though?
 
I see nothing wrong with people downloading stuff off the net for free (that said I have no idea what they use these days - torrents or some other more modern "file sharing" app, because I avoid that stuff. its not worth it to me)

Is there any real difference between:
A) downloading a song off the net
- or -
B) connecting your stereo to the computer and recording that same song off a radio station?
In the long run I see no difference, in both cases you end up with an "audio file" on the computer...

I'll state that personally I'd never pay for ANY file (doesn't matter what it is)...if there'd a CD I want, it'll eventually show up at one of the thrift stores or the local Used CD store. Then I'll just buy it there (which I've done plenty of times) and have better quality than some downloaded MP3. If I want MP3's for portability I can make my own off that CD..
 
I'll state that personally I'd never pay for ANY file (doesn't matter what it is)...if there'd a CD I want, it'll eventually show up at one of the thrift stores or the local Used CD store. Then I'll just buy it there (which I've done plenty of times) and have better quality than some downloaded MP3. If I want MP3's for portability I can make my own off that CD..

This mindset, also, makes a LOT more sense than it did when I was a young adult. Those who are younger than perhaps 40 (and, if your username has anything to do with birth date, you're RIGHT on that edge), and especially if they started using computers early in the game when Windows 3.1 or Windows 95 was still the newest software, "scarcity" of media is only a childhood memory. Going back a little bit farther, into the 1970's, it was not even readily possible to buy movies, and old music (especially rock and roll or country "oldies") could only be found easily on reissue vinyl and mostly only in larger cities. (Granted, I knew how to find this stuff much more readily, as it's WHAT I DO, but I'm definitely the exception. Just ask G-Lexington. He knows what I mean here.)

It is STILL true that experiencing recorded media of any kind, can only be done comfortably ONE THING AT A TIME. (OK, I like music "mash-up" and collage too, but that is an extreme acquired taste, and it barely exists at all.) The amount of music that now exists is incredible. If there's something that 72-Jay or anybody else wants, chances are that it is only ONE item out of hundreds or perhaps thousands of items that provide entertainment, and in many cases the Jones can be satisfied by going to YouTube. While waiting for any of those seven things you really want to show up somewhere, you're going to find another 9 or 182 things that are fine for you, so just because your wanted early Nickelback CD hasn't shown up in your favorite shopping places yet, you don't walk away media-starved, you probably find something else you like. Unless one's tastes are very restricted, it's difficult not to find something that's satisfactory.

And, therefore, one can still occupy listening time with moozik, even if it isn't the EXACT moozik that you were trying to get.

72-Jay, what do you do, though, when you like a band and they're not actually releasing CD's? That's something much more common now, and that wasn't true 15 or 20 years ago. Nowadays even some of the tunes (Oh NOES!!! I didn't call them songs! Stop this before it spreads!!!) on Billboard's "Hot 100" singles charts are DOWNLOADS only, with no analogous "hard copy" available. Though, if the artist is successful enough to land on the Hot 100, they'll usually release an album eventually. But even if they put that song (ahhhhh...that's better) on the album, it may not be the mix that you want.

I still remember sitting in front of the radio in 1966, hoping against hope that the soul FM station from Toledo, Ohio (the only source, at the time, to hear soul music on FM) would eventually play Wilson Pickett's "Land of 1,000 Dances" - and how ecstatic I was when they finally DID play it...and I snagged that thing onto a reel to reel tape!!!

Strangely, though I was living in a county with a population near 100,000...there was NO full-service record store in the area which actually stocked records that were no longer on the Charts. That was a very unusual circumstance, indeed. Much later I found out that even places like Pampa, Texas and Spencer, West Virginia and Linton, Indiana and Red Bluff, California had full service record stores during that same time.
 
^ 72-Jay's "version" of waiting for the used CD to show up cheap somewhere, of course, has its corollary back in the older era as well. "Used record shops" as such didn't REALLY exist 40 to 50 years ago, but one would wait and hope that the sought records (45RPM and/or album, depending on your preference at the time) would show up at the Salvation Army/Goodwill or similar thrift places, or perhaps in the 29-cent dump bin at Arlan's or Topp's, or in a cheap bin at Kresge's or something.

More fortunate music fans may have actually known a source of records taken off jukeboxes and taken back to the vendor, and been able to buy the castoffs that way (usually 25 cents or less each). One didn't have to wait long at all for that wanted song to turn up and, unless one was adventurous, musical tastes were more or less limited to what was on the RADIO. And since jukeboxes generally played hits, it was GUARANTEED that your wanted radio hit would become available, cheap, if you were only willing to wait a month or two.

And, though these castoff singles were rarely "mint" - we were satisfied because, often, we were only listening on some $30 record player or something, or perhaps one of those hi-fi consoles (which were actually FURNITURE outfitted usually with a record player and sometimes also a TV set). Most of us didn't know anything about fine quality cartridges and styli, and unless the record was blasted-all-to-shit, it generally sounded fine.
 
frankfrank said:
This mindset, also, makes a LOT more sense than it did when I was a young adult. Those who are younger than perhaps 40 (and, if your username has anything to do with birth date, you're RIGHT on that edge), and especially if they started using computers early in the game when Windows 3.1 or Windows 95 was still the newest software, "scarcity" of media is only a childhood memory. Going back a little bit farther, into the 1970's, it was not even readily possible to buy movies, and old music (especially rock and roll or country "oldies") could only be found easily on reissue vinyl and mostly only in larger cities. (Granted, I knew how to find this stuff much more readily, as it's WHAT I DO, but I'm definitely the exception. Just ask G-Lexington. He knows what I mean here.)
Yep you're correct on the username/age...
I actually started using computers back before the Windows 3.1 days when it was all DOS :)
Save for borrowing (& copying to cassette) a limited number of CD's (plus recording stuff off the radio) when I was highschool age, I didn't really start collecting/getting into music until sometime in my 20's... Then I would hit sales at the normal stores. Once used CD stores started showing up that became my place (allot of which have since closed). I eventually found out about thrift-stores & garage-sales :)

I like music "mash-up" and collage too, but that is an extreme acquired taste, and it barely exists at all.
LOL some of those 'mash-ups' (or 'booty-mixes' as I've seen it called) are fun

While waiting for any of those seven things you really want to show up somewhere, you're going to find another 9 or 182 things that are fine for you, so just because your wanted early Nickelback CD hasn't shown up in your favorite shopping places yet, you don't walk away media-starved,
Thats the problem with going to those places ... even if I don't find whatever the main thing(s) I mighta been looking for, I usually end up getting something else :lol:

And, therefore, one can still occupy listening time with moozik, even if it isn't the EXACT moozik that you were trying to get.
LOL on the term "moozik" because I use that too

72-Jay, what do you do, though, when you like a band and they're not actually releasing CD's?
If its a download then it'd have to be free (even if technically not legal) but I'd still avoid that file-sharing stuff, so finding/obtaining the files might be hard LOL
Actually on this...Last year there was one song I wanted after hearing it on FM/radio, HD-2 station so they didn't just play mainstream stuff (sadly said station no longer exists) .. googled for the song/artist but couldn't find much info ... found a vid on YouTube, there they said it wasn't out on CD / only available as a (paid) download. I went for my one & only option - record it directly from radio...so now I have a MP3
I still remember sitting in front of the radio in 1966, hoping against hope that the soul FM station from Toledo, Ohio (the only source, at the time, to hear soul music on FM) would eventually play Wilson Pickett's "Land of 1,000 Dances" - and how ecstatic I was when they finally DID play it...and I snagged that thing onto a reel to reel tape!!!
I once saw some actual albums?(maybe just singles ? ) on reel to reel tape at Goodwill...was shocked to know such things even existed :eek: Wonder what those woulda cost someone when they were new? (probably shoulda grabbed that stuff & re-sold it on ebay LOL)
 
I STILL record on Reel to Reel, although purely as a hobby and on an actual studio machine. The rest of my music I stream off Pandora or hard drive.

Back before digital, that's what you did. You sat in front of the radio with a cassette deck and waited for the DJ to play stuff you liked.
I also still have a ton of cassettes.... ironically, some of those sound better than the crap offered today.

One of my favorites was taping the Dr. Demento Show on the Mighty MET. (Anyone remember that?) Good times. Maybe oddly simple times.
 
I will admit I will steal when it is impossible to find it anywhere else, but I do think it is wrong.

Look at it this way. You just spent $1000 out of your own pocket to produce some good quality porn. Everything came from your head, and it is ultimately your baby. Hell, you might even be more proud of it than your real child. Now it's time to put it out there for the world to behold and hopefully recoup your personal financial loss and launch a career ultimately. Your porn is well received and word of mouth starts to get around. Everyone knows it is conviently found on your website, for a reasonable price. Hell, it is even in the teaser video where to buy, but 90 out of 100 people download it illegally. You can't afford to make anything new, and the $1000 you put into it is lost forever. You also have angry actors who expected to be recouped handsomly from the sale of this video, but you can't give them the money they want.
 
I will admit I will steal when it is impossible to find it anywhere else, but I do think it is wrong.

Look at it this way. You just spent $1000 out of your own pocket to produce some good quality porn. Everything came from your head, and it is ultimately your baby. Hell, you might even be more proud of it than your real child. Now it's time to put it out there for the world to behold and hopefully recoup your personal financial loss and launch a career ultimately. Your porn is well received and word of mouth starts to get around. Everyone knows it is conviently found on your website, for a reasonable price. Hell, it is even in the teaser video where to buy, but 90 out of 100 people download it illegally. You can't afford to make anything new, and the $1000 you put into it is lost forever. You also have angry actors who expected to be recouped handsomly from the sale of this video, but you can't give them the money they want.

95% of the events in your premise is speculation/fabricated. I'm revoking the Vulcan in your avatar. You're not very logical. ;)
 
So since I feel my particular angle was ever really addressed:

1) You bookmark a song you like on youtube to listen to when you like-- the person who put the youtube up is NOT the artist, or affiliated with the label or record company. This easily accounts for 99.99% of all songs posted on youtube. The hits aren't going to the artist.

2) You open up wavepad and save the song and play it in winamp instead.

What was the difference, ethically?
 
This is great. I'm going to steal whatever I please from refuji, and if he thinks about calling the authorities, I'll just threaten to point them to this thread.

Well... are you STEALING from Refuji... or COPYING from him ? ;)
 
This is great. I'm going to steal whatever I please from refuji, and if he thinks about calling the authorities, I'll just threaten to point them to this thread.

Any analogy here would be bad but think of it this way.

Refuji plays piano in his house, you hear it everyday, and he brings people over and charges them to hear it in person.

You mention hearing him play from your bedroom and he accuses you of stealing.
 
Back
Top