Followup to the Previous Article
Take one sensationalist headline on a topic that Digg users are interested in. Add a personal experience, some personal beliefs, a few questions and stir. Wait for someone to submit the article to Digg and 9 hours later, front page!
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. I am not a person in a position of authority. I am not a professional anything. I am retired. The country in question is the United States of America.
The headline is not really any more sensationalist than the MPAA message on DVDs that says "Downloading pirated movies is stealing", comparing it the theft of a car or a purse. The difference is that their statement is designed to instill FUD. By stating that it's theft, it paints anyone doing it as a common criminal. Downloading a pirated file of any kind can not be classified as anything greater than a copyright infringement. Copyright infringement is a civil matter (except in cases covered by the NET Act in which it can be a criminal matter). If your act of downloading is not covered by the NET Act, you are not guilty of a crime. For the sake of argument, let's exclude the NET Act. The MPAA called you a thief, a criminal. What do you think about that? Especially since, in the case of a civil matter, you can be sued but not tried for a crime.
That's how simple it is, but the **AAs would have you think otherwise. In my previous article Downloading Pirated Anything Is NOT Illegal, I stated that downloading in itself was not illegal. It should have been "not theft" instead of "not illegal". I was being misleading, but no more so than the **AAs.
Truth be told, that article should never have made it to the front page of Digg, especially after all the bad things I've said about Digg users on this blog. I didn't submit the article and I wouldn't have submitted it. I didn't believe it was worthy and most of my articles on Digg usually get buried or ignored anyway.
The article rose to the front page in 9 hours. That allowed plenty of time for it to get buried. If anyone is angry about the comments following the article, or the comments following the post on Digg, you have no one to blame but yourself and your herd mentality.
Summary: Downloading ANY file can be legal or illegal depending on the situation. The situation dictates the legality, not the actual act. Copyright infringement is not equal to the legal definition of theft.
Similar Posts:
Good info. I can't stand the digg crowd!
I'll thank you to lay off of the digg crowd, like any group we have our assholes, and we have our share of great people.
Nice to see your blog back online RT.
In response to s42 above: why do you have to use vulgarity and phrase your comment like that? It only supports the "typical digg user" view the author is trying to point out.
Besides, if you aren't one of the individuals in question then why does he need to lay off anything?
@ Matthew Jabs:
Vulgarity?! You mean "asshole"? Geeze. Touchy touchy.
I see your Alexa rank & your technorati ranking improved quite a bit!
Funny what makes you popular isn't it!!
Popularity is a funny thing. It can be driven by like or dislike both. Controversy ALWAYS increases popularity.
this is right but im not sure about what you said on the NET act. im starting research on this
woohoo
It's been so long, I don't even know what I said.
[...] from Untwisted Vortex pointed out in his articles – Downloaded Pirated Anything is not Illegal, and Followup to the Previous Article – the followup's included so that the whole story is there – the only thing that can happen [...]