Are we all pirates?

[penguin_king]

a friend of mine brought up an interesting point today. he said that anyone with the internet is basically a pirate.

at first, it seems ludicrous, but after thinking about it for a while i realised something, piracy is (in my opinion) just stealing. i cant really think of a good way to put this so i'll use an example.

lets say that you go to Wikipedia to research something, and somebdy has quoted a book on that page. did you pay for the book? no. but you are still being given access to the information for free.

even if we disregard all of the REAL pirates on the internet (software, music, movies etc.) this could still be called stealing. even if the person gives all credit and cites their work properly, you are still able to access information for free that you would normally need to pay for.


im not calling us all pirates, and even if i were i wouldnt have a problem with it because it would mean that i'm one too.

im just curious on everyone else views on this.

[dragon wench]

Quote:

Originally Posted by penguin_king lets say that you go to Wikipedia to research something, and somebdy has quoted a book on that page. did you pay for the book? no. but you are still being given access to the information for free.

So does that mean you are stealing if you read a book in the library?

[SupaCat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by penguin_king lets say that you go to Wikipedia to research something, and somebdy has quoted a book on that page. did you pay for the book? no. but you are still being given access to the information for free. even if we disregard all of the REAL pirates on the internet (software, music, movies etc.) this could still be called stealing. even if the person gives all credit and cites their work properly, you are still able to access information for free that you would normally need to pay for.

If the author doesn't want him to be quoted, he'll complain and the page will be removed. Hell, quotes and references can be even seen as a commercial for the book or movie. As long if you mention the source, it's legally in the law.

If I would go to the library and won a prize: I can get 5 books lend out without paying. Is going to the library stealing?

If I quote someone in a conversation, is that stealing?

You have to draw the line somewhere Pinguin_King, if only for your conscience. I could come up with more examples, but it's been a long day for me, hell dayS actually.

[dragon wench]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SupaCat If the author doesn't want him to be quoted, he'll complain and the page will be removed. Hell, quotes and references can be even seen as a commercial for the book or movie. As long if you mention the source, it's legally in the law.

Agreed, in my view, as long as you give due credit to the author it is not stealing. Universities and colleges see it the same way, providing you properly document your sources you are fine, but if you don't it is plagiarism and grounds for expulsion.

[Fiberfar]

Blimey!
I was hoping this thread was about rum, booty and loot. ARR!

Naw, I don't think reading an article on wikipedia will make you an pirate.

[DesR85]

Quote:

Originally Posted by penguin_king lets say that you go to Wikipedia to research something, and somebdy has quoted a book on that page. did you pay for the book? no. but you are still being given access to the information for free. even if we disregard all of the REAL pirates on the internet (software, music, movies etc.) this could still be called stealing. even if the person gives all credit and cites their work properly, you are still able to access information for free that you would normally need to pay for.

Is reading articles on the internet considered theft? It's paranoid to think like that, especially when the author voluntarily put up his/her article for everyone to read.

[Xandax]

Well, take the argument a step further and I'll not be able to tell you about a movie I saw, because it'll infringe copyright?
You can't read headlines on newspapers as you stand in line at the supermarket, because you didn't pay for it. And so on.....
There is a huge difference between quoting a book/paragraph and then ripping the entire thing or almost the entire thing - I believe the term is "fair use" in the USA.
As for posting paragraphs on Wikepedia, then it is a gray area indeed, akin to videos posted at YouTube. IMO if they are made without the acceptance of the author/rights holder they should be removed, but it doesn't make viewing it piracy. Lest you continue to post it when it gets removed, or copy it to use it elsewhere.


Basically the entire "piracy" debate is very difficult and a gray area. But my theory is that it is because it is founded in our experience with a material world, which is unable to deal with the concepts of the immaterial electronic world.

[Moonbiter]

Shiver Me Timbers! Yes I'm a pirate. See that quote on the bottom here? Stolen shamelessly from that ole' jessie Oscar, that is. Penguin King, you should change your nick to Captain Nobeard of the BS Leaky Bathtub.

[jklinders]

I'd like to expand slightly on what Xandax said about fair use. Without the ability to use someone else's work even attributed for research purposes every high school student who wrote an essay would be a criminal Egad, I've been on the lam for nearly 16 years for that essay I wrote in high school history on the battle of Vimy Ridge. Fair use is actually a required element of all education, or it would be prohibitively expensive. Throughout most of my schooling, the text books were older than I was. If the schools had to buy new books each year(or the parents for that matter)we would not have public education at all I'd warrant.

[Bloodstalker]

Quote:

Originally Posted by penguin_king lets say that you go to Wikipedia to research something, and somebdy has quoted a book on that page. did you pay for the book? no. but you are still being given access to the information for free.

Don't know, since with Wikipedia, it's just as likely what you are reading is wrong or flat out made up as it is that the quotation is accurate.

As to the original question though, universities worldwide are based on the fact that it is perfectly acceptable to go to a library, reseach a topic, and then use quotations in your papers so long as credit is fairly given. No ones knowledge is completely original, and every book you read about any historical, social, scientific or any other subject was wriitten by an author who drew heavily on the work of others that he/she likely didn't pay for either. The book you may be quoting from was written based on other books that were written based on other books and so on down the line.

It's not only an accepted fact that books will be used in this manner, it's encouraged to promote new ideas and research into various topics. Individuals are legally able to use these kinds of materials, as Xan has already pointed out, provided they give the required credit to the original authors and they do not simply lift entire passages and attempt to pass it off as their own work. For example, I couldn't write a book on Julius Caesar, buy a copy of Adrian Goldsworthy's biography of Julius Caesar, and simply reword what he has written. That's plagerism. I can, however, go to the library, borrow a copy of his book, and quote examples to support my own ideas and interpretations.

It's also worth remembering that there are a lot of materials that are available that aren't protected in any way. There are tons of materials that are public domain. Many of them are still sold in book stores, but you can also look around online and find the entire book posted somewhere for free. You can, for example, buy the collective works of Shakespeare from a book store, or just look up his plays online and read the whole things for free legally, so some of what is being quoted on sites may not even be subject to copywrite laws. While the book you buy may be copywrited, it generally applies because the book is either the authors original translation of the material or because it contains added content like discussions of certain scenes, footnoted comments to add to or expand on the original work and so on. For example, anything written before 1923 is considered in the U.S. to be public domain and not protected under copyright laws.There are also a large number written since that date that have entered public domain for various reasons. While you still have to give proper credit when using them to avoid plagerism, there isn't anything illegal about them being posted anywhere online for free.