FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Study finds kids justify illegal downloads





Vrythramax
Quote:
BRUSSELS (Hollywood Reporter) - Children in Europe are aware of the risks of illegal downloading, but often rationalize their act by saying that everyone -- including their parents -- is doing it, according to a major European Commission survey.

Other excuses included: the download is for personal and private purposes; the Web sites presumably remunerate the artists; claims of harm inflicted on artists lack credibility; and DVDs and CDs are simply too expensive.

Almost all of the children surveyed in the 27 European Union member countries as well as in Norway and Iceland said they expect to continue downloading. They also said the risk of downloading a virus was far more dissuasive than the risk of legal proceedings.

The survey results, released Friday, found that most kids use the Internet several times a day and, while Internet use is to some extent limited by parents, most own their own mobile phones, the use of which is largely unsupervised.

The survey also found that children are much more attuned to such potential online risks as security, viruses, identity theft and potential dangerous contact with strangers than parents imagine, and tend to know about the necessary precautions.


Source

Just because others are doing it doesn't make it right, nor legal. It's become to easy to steal off the internet, so easy in fact that many people don't even think it's stealing anymore. I think the predominant thinking is "if it's on the Internet, it's free for everyone because the internet is free afterall".

Most roadways are free also, but (many) wouldn't steal a car simply because it was free to drive on that road.
MeddlingMonk
Quote:
Just because others are doing it doesn't make it right, nor legal. It's become to easy to steal off the internet, so easy in fact that many people don't even think it's stealing anymore. I think the predominant thinking is "if it's on the Internet, it's free for everyone because the internet is free afterall".


I agree with your sentiments. It's like the old adage about something not being wrong if you don't get caught. I would add that there would be people who probably do realise that they are illegally downloading copyrighted material and continue anyway, justifying it by believing that the Internet allows them to anonymously commit the crime of theft, or that enough people would buy the actual product, or simply not caring that they're breaking the law.
paul_indo
I think you would find the same thing with any group of people who regularly do something illegal, like speeding on the roads, underage drinking etc.

People by nature think that what they do is justified by their circumstances, even if they might agree that others shouldn't do it.
MeddlingMonk
Quote:
I think you would find the same thing with any group of people who regularly do something illegal, like speeding on the roads, underage drinking etc.

People by nature think that what they do is justified by their circumstances, even if they might agree that others shouldn't do it.


Indeed. I wasn't suggesting that this phenomenon was limited to the Internet, though; the principle applies to many other facets of everyday life. It is amazing how people try to justify their actions, even when they know they're just kidding themselves. I wonder how many people believe that the ends justifies the means...
Vrythramax
I think this study, which I'd love to actually read, was only limited to Internet activities. But I agree that the more a person does something the easier it is to justify in ones own mind.
Emmer-Compascuum
I agree as well. Too many people in Europe illegally download software, movies and audio as if it's completely normal and try to justify that.
Much used arguments I heard are 'But it's free...' (Yeah. Cool isn't it? The burglar said the same thing), 'I would never buy music anyway, so why bother going to the store?' (you don't know that) and 'According to the law, it's only forbidden to upload such content; downloading it isn't illegal' (while this may be true, it won't help you much anyway: if you download something off a P2P-network or torrent network you upload too).
What also makes it easier for people to justify it, is the fact that unlike normal ways of stealing, you don't cause damage to someone directly. In fact, there are even people/groups who (proud and friendly) offer you the download.

Illegally downloading stuff is not good. But I think the only way for people to understand that is being robbed. Then they know how it feels.
indianinworld
It happens all the time, everywhere...

This is not restriced to any part of the world Smile. Almost all countries which has Internet download illegal contents, most of which are unsupervised by their parents... As laws differs from one place to another - I don't think there is a solution for this, untill and otherwise the government of all nations join their hands and work togeather.

I think whoever is posting here will also download illegal stuffs in one way or the other. Please note that, if you use any of the illegal contents, then too you will be falling indirectly under this category Wink.

So No worries untill then..... Razz
smarter
Vrythramax wrote:

Just because others are doing it doesn't make it right, nor legal. It's become to easy to steal off the internet, so easy in fact that many people don't even think it's stealing anymore.


1) To steal is to deprive somebody of something. If you steal a car, its owner would not have that car ANY MORE. If a kid downloads a rock album media corporations will cry: THIEF! We've lost ONE sale! 20euros! In fact that kid's parents would have never allowed their offspring to buy a rock album.

2) If something is illegal, it doesn't mean it's also immoral. In fact, IPs are immoral. Ideas are not property of anyone. IP owners steal from humanity (We got the patent first in this country!). No IP owner lived on the Moon and created something out of nothing. They used ideas from others who used ideas from others. It's funny how the thiefs are the first to cry THIEF! See Alcatel vs. Microsoft and the many lawsuits between corporations.

Many people are so brainwashed they don't even see this SIMPLE FACT: you can go to a public library and read the latest Potter book for FREE. Tell me the difference between one kid illegally downloading it from the internet and other kid legally borrowing it from a library. IP owners didn't dare to attack the libraries... yet!

3) Many things that were illegal yesterday are legal today (for example homosexual sex). On the other hand what makes you think downloading IS ACTUALLY illegal in all countries? E.g. Sweden until 2005 and even after in spite of US and EU pressure. What makes you think downloading for nonprofit use will not be legal in 10 years?

4) Additionally, western European governments and courts have been reluctant to criminally prosecute their citizens who download films, music etc, especially for nonprofit purposes.

Quote:
Most roadways are free also, but (many) wouldn't steal a car simply because it was free to drive on that road.


your logic is weird, very weird.... and completely off the road! Laughing But you can find this bizarre kind of logic in the past when media corporations tried to COMPLETELY BAN audio cassettes, VHS, cds etc.

Emmer-Compascuum wrote:
Illegally downloading stuff is not good. But I think the only way for people to understand that is being robbed. Then they know how it feels.


Comparing downloading to robbing is like comparing apples to oranges. Some people just don't get it!
But in spite of the blind in the last couple of years more and more IP owners offer for free books, music etc.
Chalchihuitlicue
I agree that downloading is generally a bad thing... However, I do have to point out that I never would have found any of my favorite bands had I not downloaded their music by chance because their name sounded cool or I liked the way they looked.

I then proceeded to buy all their albums, and now take gleeful pride in owning them all, even if no one else where I am knows who the bands are.

So it may not entirely be "evil" for people to download things. Would I have bought the 30-some odd Japanese rock albums I have if I hadn't heard their music before? Probably not - they're awfully expensive ($20-$45 each) to buy on a whim simply because the band looks cool, and in the United States there is very little chance of being exposed to Japanese music on the radio (Dir en grey and Ellegarden being possible exceptions). My solution? Download some of their music, make sure I like it, then buy. And then I don't need the downloaded stuff any more. Very Happy So I get rid of it and rip my own cds to my computer. The quality is usually better that way, anyway.

Just pointing out that it is possible to use downloading as a means to find good music, while still buying the actual music and supporting the artist. XD Still saving up to get the rest of the Malice Mizer cds, but I'm getting there!
HollyK
Why does it take a study to show that if someone downloads illegal music they will attempt to justify it? I would have thought it would have been dead obvious. However, it ticks me off when people rag on legitimate online file sharing (To share, say, Linux?). As for:
Quote:
Many people are so brainwashed they don't even see this SIMPLE FACT: you can go to a public library and read the latest Potter book for FREE. Tell me the difference between one kid illegally downloading it from the internet and other kid legally borrowing it from a library. IP owners didn't dare to attack the libraries... yet!

It's a legal quirk called the fair use clause.
joshumu
I agree with 'smarters' definition of theft. Its coping, not stealing. I think programs (and to some extent other media like music and movies) should not be deprived from people. Why should people born into money (or was cut throat enough to accumulate it) have more access to tools then others. Pirating software helps to break the bonds of class and i fully support it.
LumberJack
I disagree with your post for a few reasons. Intelectual property rights etc, are intangable, therefore you cannot make a comparason with intangable things (ie. the silly roadway demonstration).

Second, how far property rights and copyrights go is currently being debated. It isn't really finalized (at least globally).

What people are doing is copying, not stealing. When you buy a CD, you own the cd, and you own the music, if you give the CD to someone else to listen to, you are in effect violating the copyrights. It is a ridiculus statement. People are COPYING music for a variety of reasons. What artists are trying to do is make Sharing Illegal. What happens when Toyota or GM starts charging you fees for loaning out your vehicle?

I understand the fears behind the illegal download of software/music, etc. However, the money that they keep bitching about is grossly overinflated.

Finally, I agree, that if you use the software or really like the artist, then you should buy their material, but if you just want to use it or listen to it once, or use it to do something once over then you can borrow it from someone even if they are far away.
Soulfire
So ... you like this band, right? But you really only want one of their songs. Does it make sense to go to the store and spend $14.95 on their CD for one song, or to go into the internet and type in the one song that you like and download it? To me, the latter actually makes sense.

Also, because the music spreads so fast, this gives bands more publicity. I've seen this happen time and time again. A friend downloads a song, shows me, and then I get interested in the band. Who knows, maybe even go to the FYE and buy their CD?

Tell me, do you speed when you drive? I'm sure you don't always obey all speed limits. That's also illegal!
Arnie
Only kids justify it? Actually most people act as if it's their God-given right to get anything they want. Read more... (I nicked this quote from Bro. Tiag on the aforementioned link.)

And sure, there you heroes are with all your noble purposes, but in the end it's just about you getting stuff for free, isn't it? If you really were as noble as you're claiming to be, you'd use and contribute to free alternatives instead of taking something illegaly. And by doing so actually prolonging the inequality because you're keeping yourself and the people around you dependent.

Go hack a bank's computer and increase your account with $1,000,000. All you changed are a bunch of digits, nothing tangible - but those digits are worth a lot of money in our modern society. Or what about nicking a bag of $100 bills? They're just papers after all, hardly worth anything for their material - but in our society we decided that they have value. And people work for it.

Exactly the same way people work to create "intangible" property like music or software. But nowadays we don't walk around trading chickens anymore. Something doesn't have to be tangible to have value - people have put just as much effort into creating e.g. software as that good old farmer did to get his crops. And they deserve to be paid.
LumberJack
Human laws change. It just takes people to decide they want to change them. Music industry doesn't like the change they see and they are trying their best to stop it Smile
smarter
To clarify what we are talking about:

1) The CURRENT law of copyright prohibits anyone to make an "unauthorized" copy of anything "created" (book, song, movie, software) until 70 years after author's death. This means if you want a copy you must pay a fee to the copyright owner (usually this is not the author/authors but a publishing house, a recording company, a movie studio etc.)

2) MOST PEOPLE ignore this Prohibition (remember Prohibition of Alcohol for laws against popular habits) and use the Internet to make copies of songs, movies, etc. for PERSONAL use. Copyright owners call this unauthorized use PIRACY or THEFT.

This is widespread because there is no criminal case against downloaders (though usually the law says it's criminal activity), there are only a few civil suits by some companies against some downloaders.

Laws should be adapted to reality (did you know that not long ago adultery has been subject to severe sanctions, including the death penalty?)

A new law that replaces "copyright" with "sellright" (only the author can sell) and for a much shorter time (10-20 years) would be a solution.

Arnie wrote:
Only kids justify it? Actually most people act as if it's their God-given right to get anything they want.


ha ha... here comes the selfrighteous who never made or used a xerox copy, an audio cassette, a video copy or a digital copy of something copyrighted without author's consent. Laughing

Arnie wrote:

And sure, there you heroes are with all your noble purposes, but in the end it's just about you getting stuff for free, isn't it? If you really were as noble as you're claiming to be, you'd use and contribute to free alternatives instead of taking something illegaly.


The selfrighteous strikes again! Laughing Alas... you got the wrong forum topic! Because here nobody "claimed" to be a hero. No Robin Hood here, dude! This is about popular habits and laws against them.

Arnie wrote:

Exactly the same way people work to create "intangible" property like music or software. ... people have put just as much effort into creating e.g. software as that good old farmer did to get his crops. And they deserve to be paid.


Music and software are not property! These are not OWNED but COPYRIGHTED. Property means forever or till you sell it EXACTLY ONE TIME but copyright is a time-limited exclusive right (author's death + 70 years) to make copies of and sell MULTIPLE TIMES copies of the thing. You are confused or trying to confuse people!

Nobody is denying creator's right to be paid for his work. All I want is elimination of the exclusive right to make copies [for personal use, educational use, scientific use, etc but not commercial use]. The creator should have only the exclusive right TO SELL copies as it was intended in the beginning.
Arnie
So now it's either you join the copy club or you get called self-righteous? That's nice. Ok, so I got one detail wrong - according to you, because it is arguable - and now I'm trying to confuse people. I bet if advocates of copying made such a mistake you wouldn't care. In fact, it already happened:
LumberJack wrote:
When you buy a CD, you own the cd, and you own the music
You have nothing to say about that, have you?

And there are enough noble purpose copiers in this topic.
smarter
Arnie wrote:
So now it's either you join the copy club or you get called self-righteous?

No! I thought you are self-righteous because of your holier-than-thou attitude: "Actually most people act as if it's their God-given right to get anything they want." Excuse me, Mr. Model Citizen who never crosses the street except at zebra crossing! I was wrong to assume that you ever xeroxed pages from a textbook, used your VCR to tape a TV show, made mp3's from an audio CD etc.

Arnie wrote:
Ok, so I got one detail wrong - according to you, because it is arguable - and now I'm trying to confuse people.


That's what you dream of : copyright = property. Fortunately, this is not the case! ... Instead I have a different dream: to get rid of the stupid Mickey Mouse laws.

Arnie wrote:

And there are enough noble purpose copiers in this topic.


Oh, copiers are loathsome beings and thiefs for not paying 30 bucks or so for their copy as opposed to the multi-billion dollar companies who are only interested in the common good of the society. And of course no copyright owner ever "borrowed" something from others. Laughing Dude, don't ever use the word "noble" when talking about copyright. Use "money" instead!

PS: Many thanks to the more and more numerous authors who give away copies of their work for free and to the software developers who work on free open source projects. Maybe "noble" is the right word for you!
roxys_art
Chalchihuitlicue wrote:
I agree that downloading is generally a bad thing... However, I do have to point out that I never would have found any of my favorite bands had I not downloaded their music by chance because their name sounded cool or I liked the way they looked.

I then proceeded to buy all their albums, and now take gleeful pride in owning them all, even if no one else where I am knows who the bands are.



This is exactly what I do. I am not going to go out and spend $15-$20 on a CD if I am not really sure if I like the band or their music. It just doesn't make any sense. So I download a few songs online, and if I like them, then I buy their CD. If I don't, then they do not get any of my money. And since more than half of the music out there sounds the same (just recycled from band to band), I am happy to have this choice of supporting only music that I enjoy and not the mainstream, popular "music."
Arnie
smarter wrote:
PS: Many thanks to the more and more numerous authors who give away copies of their work for free and to the software developers who work on free open source projects. Maybe "noble" is the right word for you!
That God-given right quote came from the Debian forums, which happens to be one of the most purist free software projects. Instead of using pirated versions because "they can't afford it" or "to fight against big corporations" (one of those noble excuses), they make and use legal alternatives instead.

And no, I am not going to prove my innocence on all the accusations you somehow manage to throw at me without even knowing me. I simply don't have to - it's nothing more than slander. As a matter of fact I do watch for the zebras, and to only copy books etc. for personal use (which is allowed here) - not in strict dead regulation, but by the spirit of the laws. And from now on you can say whatever you want about this, but I will not defend myself - you're simply out of line.

But, of course you could join the Debian forums and post some more accusations in the topic there.
Related topics
Illegal website and illegal downloads!
Traffic
Freeware downloads
Share ur ebooks here now!..
This Account has Been Suspended
Photoshop/Gimp contest: Bondings' FACE!!
Hong Kong: young man has been jailed for files sharing
Illegal Downloading, Serious Discussion
More front page news NOT on the front page..
CON-serve-va-tives and LIE-ber-alls are essentially the same
May I request permission to have music on my site?
DARNA ZROORI HAI!!!!!!!
Busta Rhymes - Does any one know...
University of California, LA: Study on media bias.
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.