OpenDNS Tells Congress Not To Create The Great... >>
<< Russian Internet Content Monitoring System To...
 tdicon 

Too Much Free Time

by Mike Masnick

Wed, Nov 9th 2011 5:30am


Filed Under:
free, invoices, piracy, thewarehouse



Hanging Out For Free Is Piracy

from the free-is-bad dept

Joe Betsill alerts us to an an amusing comic from theWAREHOUSE that seems fitting around here:
70 Comments | Leave a Comment

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    xenomancer (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 5:04am

    Do You Need an Invoice?

    You heard the man, pay up! I can't patronize you freeloading freetards with complementary 30 second samples forever! If you don't pay me what I want now then you are killing the comment industry!

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 5:35am

      Re: Do You Need an Invoice?

      You want to make money by mooching off of Mikes awesome articles and commentating on them. Sorry old chap but I'm afraid you'll have to pay a licensing fee and give up all copyright claims for said comments to Mike for all eternity. If you don't then I'm afraid you will have to be sued.

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 5:44am

    The sound of one hand clapping. The cartoon is a pretty poor attempt to self-justify piracy. Keep up the good work...

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Kaden (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 5:51am

      Re:

      When all you have is talking points, everything looks like an attempt to justify piracy.

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:01am

        Re: Re:

        Kaden, the cartoon is a cute way to both play down the idea of piracy, and to play up the "stupidity" of charging for "content", by using something that is not content. It's the typical sort of soft attempt to get a mental shift by those in the middle, by being misleading and mocking the other side's position.

        It sucks.

        [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          AJ (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:06am

          Re: Re: Re:

          "by being misleading and mocking the other side's position."

          The irony is strong with this one......

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Kaden (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:10am

          Re: Re: Re:

          So you don't see it as a commentary on how Big Content slathers the grim specter of piracy on top of every spurious cash grab initiative in an attempt to harness moral outrage as a societal lubricant?

          Because that's what I see.

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          The eejit (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:21am

          Re: Re: Re:

          It's not a cartoon, therefore your argument is invalid. Now pay up for posting here!

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:43am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Stupid is believing that something imaterial without form can be content.

          I ask myself why musicians have to pay other musicians, if someone does a cover he is investing in that music, he is taking somebody else expressions and making his own, working with it and he has to pay the first one?

          Why?

          Can restaurants charge other restaurants for using their recipes? can Rolland charge musicians for making music with their content? every musician should pay the manufacturers of sound equipment shouldn't they?

          Musicians can't possibly expect to use somebody else work to make a profit and don't pay anything for what people have done before right?

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:17am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            "I ask myself why musicians have to pay other musicians, if someone does a cover he is investing in that music, he is taking somebody else expressions and making his own, working with it and he has to pay the first one?"

            The simple answer is that without the original work, the secondary work does not exist. It would be a remake of silence, which is what we get all the time for free.

            The rest of your recipe and sound equipment rants only goes to show how hard you are working to obscure the obvious.

            [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:24am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              Then nothing would be ever made since in your head everything needs to come from somewhere, but that is not what it happens is it?

              Now, why should you get things for free without paying the people who enable you?

              According to yourself without work done before there would never be future work is that not right?

              So can there be musicians without instruments? Rolland, Yamaha should collect money from the use of their property no?

              Why manufacturers of musical instruments that enable musicians everywhere to play for large crowds not paid by their work?is their property lesser in importance somehow to the creation of imaginary property?

              [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                Greevar (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:35am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                Everything is built on what came before. That's why nobody should have the right to claim "ownership" of any intangible art. Art comes from what people have done in the past and thus, it belongs all of humanity equally. Nobody should be restricted from copying, altering, remixing, etc. of old ideas into new expressions.

                "All art is derivative. There is no form of art that is totally original... 'originality' is a modern art construct... a silly concession to marketing concerns." - Paul deMarrais

                [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:30am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              The rest of your recipe and sound equipment rants only goes to show how hard you are working to obscure the obvious.


              The same can be said about your little rant about how artists create something and need to be paid, everybody needs to be paid for their work, not extort others that do the work or the same work, I don't see carpenters suing each other for doing the exact same things do you?

              [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • icon
                btrussell (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:59am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                Nope. And since we haven't mastered growing straight trees with straight grain, it takes skill, knowledge and creativity to build.

                Shelter is more valuable to me than "Give Me Shelter" is.

                [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              ethorad (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 9:16am

              Unauthorised silence?

              It would be a remake of silence, which is what we get all the time for free.

              Actually, it would be an unauthorised version of 4'33".

              John Cage doesn't get nearly enough in royalties for that piece!

              [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:15am

          Re: Re: Re:

          I don't think it sucks, I think it is an accurate portrait of the parasitic nature of copyright.

          The real thieves are artists that don't do the work anymore and keep asking the people who do to pay them.

          Why should any musician lose his job at a bar because the owner was threatened by a collection agency?

          Why should anybody who works in front of a crowd for 8 or more hours a day have to pay anything to some dude he wouldn't even be allowed to get close to it?

          Copyright parasites don't work they extort money from those who do and threaten their own fans.

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Ninja (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:58am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Nothing that copyright trolls don't do regularly.

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 5:59am

      Re:

      It's pretty obvious what you're doing with your other hand, boy.

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:01am

      Re:

      "The cartoon is a pretty poor attempt to self-justify piracy."

      Come up with something better.
      ...funny, I don't see anything...

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Bengie, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:11am

      Re:

      Anything you every hear or see is content. PAY UP!

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:36am

    This is hilarious, because the webcomic is drawn in more or less the same style as Cyanide and Happiness.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:42am

    Sorry, but standing next to someone, creating nothing, and then providing an invoice for payment does not comprise the creation of "an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression".

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      The Infamous Joe (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:54am

      Re:

      What if I was standing next to him, acting out an original play, or telling jokes, or singing a song?

      Did I still create nothing?

      I needs me more protection for my art!!!11eleven

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      The Groove Tiger (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 6:55am

      Re:

      Perhaps the same could be said about all artists!

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Bengie, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:19am

      Re:

      "creating nothing"

      He did create something, he talked. Unless you're arguing against audio not being copyrightable, but then music couldn't be copyrighted.

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:29am

        Re: Re:

        At the risk of repeating myself, read 17 USC 101. Unlesa and until an original work of authorship is "fixed", copyright law does not apply. Fixation is a condition precedent to securing a copyright.

        [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          The Devil's Coachman (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:45am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Is that "fixed" as in what vets do to dogs and cats?

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          btrussell (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:09am

          Re: Re: Re:

          The copyright system is "fixed."

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Bengie, 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:16am

          Re: Re: Re:

          The human rain is just a computer. It's dynamically "fixed" as it's recorded into memory.

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          ethorad (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 9:12am

          Re: Re: Re:

          So can we video rock concerts without breaching copyright?

          Afterall performances by their very nature are not fixed. They may be performing something which they have a fixed version of, but the live version will have differences - plus in videoing you are adding creative decisions about framing the shots etc.

          [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            John Fenderson (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 4:09pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            So can we video rock concerts without breaching copyright?


            An interesting question. On the face of it, it seems the answer is "yes".

            However, every concert/play/movie ticket I've ever seen has terms attached to it that forbid recording. It may not be a copyright violation, but it would be breach of contract.

            [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:34am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              I agree that it is an interesting question if "fixation" has not taken place prior to or during the concert (see Title 17, Section 101 and the "transmission" provision associated with "fixation").

              While this is a highly improbable situation, it is nevertheless a possibility that does make this an interesting question as you note.

              [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Mike Masnick (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 9:43am

      Re:

      Sorry, but standing next to someone, creating nothing, and then providing an invoice for payment does not comprise the creation of "an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression".

      I fear your sense of humor needs recalibration.

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      xenomancer (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:34pm

      Re:

      What about the invoice? Clearly some creativity went into the numbers printed on it.

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Jose_X, 18 Nov 2011 @ 9:45pm

      Re:

      >> Sorry, but standing next to someone, creating nothing, and then providing an invoice for payment does not comprise the creation of "an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression".

      Is promoting a narrow interpretation of "tangible medium of expression" and of "authorship" that excludes the observer's brain your way of saying that you don't value the work, creativity, spontaneity, privacy sharing, and inspiration that results from hanging out with someone else? Do you really want to go on record as saying you don't value the creator's expression and impression on his/her audience's mind and the work required on his/her part?

      What if the audience then goes on to create a work that derives ideas and expressions arrived at with the help of that valuable hanging out moment? What if the observer records the moment and makes lots of money afterward? Are you saying that you think the original creator is not entitled to a cut of the profits or injunctive relief?

      What kind of anon ac troll are you!

      It's because of fake trolls like yourself that in this day and age we still have many slaves performing and creating purely and exclusively for the sake of others without receiving a dime in compensation.

      It's as if you don't value people's time or think creativity falls from a tree.

      Hanging-outers have been exploited for far too long, and if our Congress depends on the opinion of people like yourself, it will be years still before this injustice has been corrected.

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:16am

    First you pay...
    http://mimiandeunice.com/2011/11/08/careful-i/

    ...then you suffer.
    http://mimiandeunice.com/2011/11/09/careful-ii/

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    TheOldFart (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:36am

    "I want my twooo dolllarsss..."

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 7:58am

    derp

    what a dumb comic.. of course anything that heralds piracy mikey is all over.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      btrussell (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:20am

      Re: derp

      It says piracy is wrong.

      You don't think you should be able to come here and post for free do you? It costs money to run a site. I know it isn't being run by Gene Simmons or Angelina Jolie, but it still costs money.

      Don't be a jerk just because you don't like the content. If the price is too high, don't use that to justify your actions.
      Just quit coming here.

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:35am

    Isn't the cartoon pointing out that culture being shared is piracy?

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:42am

    Why IP laws are so bad:

    Quote:
    But many of the technologies that these patents protect are so abstruse or vague that companies may end up running afoul of the law without even knowing it, said Bijal V. Vakil, a partner at law firm White & Case in Palo Alto, Calif.

    "It's become a virtually unmanageable task to go and see if you have the freedom to operate," he said. "Procedurally it would be impossible to check all of (the valid patents) - even large companies can't afford to do that."

    Source: http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-11-apple-legal-war-android.html

    Even science dedicated blogs are noticing.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:44am

    so ho long till someone is sued for being able to hear a concert outside the venue and not having a valid ticket?

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Bob, 9 Nov 2011 @ 8:47am

    Real content providers actually put a price at the door

    Real content creators give content away all the time. When they want to charge, though, they put a price tag on it and make sure that the customer knows it's there. That's just how business is done. No one sends an invoice after the fact.

    Sigh. The irony is that the web comic author is actually trying to monetize what is given for free-- but with a legit form of business. There are t-shirts, coffee mugs and over five pages of stuff all available for a price.

    I wish the author well because it's tough to run a business. I just wish the author had some sympathy for the other creators who are trying to do the same.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Chosen Reject (profile), 9 Nov 2011 @ 12:07pm

      Re: Real content providers actually put a price at the door

      The creator of the comic gets the digital age though. He has an infinite good that he gives away (the comic) and sells scarce goods that are not easily reproducible. He uses the infinite good to increase the value of the scarce good. Few if any people would buy this coffee mug for $17, but he uses the free infinite good to make that mug more valuable than a plain one that sells for $4.

      No one is saying that creators shouldn't get paid. You either don't understand the arguments being made here, or you are being deliberately obtuse to further some agenda of yours.

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 3:08pm

      Re: Real content providers actually put a price at the door

      So you admit that not everything needs a price tag and that some things drive the sales of other things.

      Well dumbass welcome to the radio era or the television era you are just late to the game just about a 100 years or so but you will catch up I'm sure.

      Now please can you point me to the nearest website of a musician so I can rip his music from his own website and have him closed for inducing piracy.

      [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Nov 2011 @ 10:54am

    It will always be free of charge to hang out with me. So long as you don't mind the annoying ads I have on my sleeves...

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    MPAA RIAA sucks, 9 Nov 2011 @ 3:09pm

    anal leakage

    The last line should read "And pirating content, along with child pornography, is wrong." Then if you argue against their point, you must be for child pornography.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
OpenDNS Tells Congress Not To Create The Great... >>
<< Russian Internet Content Monitoring System To...
 tdicon 
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: I Invented Email
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories

Tuesday

19:32 Court Allows San Diego Comic-Con's Suit Against The Salt Lake City Comic Con To Move Forward (3)
15:35 HP Brings Back Obnoxious DRM That Cripples Competing Printer Cartridges (10)
13:30 Techdirt Podcast Episode 138: When Godwin's Law Met The Streisand Effect (0)
11:53 Senator Blumenthal Happy That SESTA Will Kill Small Internet Companies (50)
10:43 Shockingly, NY Times Columnist Is Totally Clueless About The Internet (44)
10:38 Daily Deal: Ultimate Windows File Management Suite (0)
09:02 Is There A Single Online Service Not Put At Risk By SESTA? (25)
06:31 Why SESTA Is Such A Bad Bill (31)
03:23 California Sides With Comcast, Votes To Kill Broadband Privacy Law Favored By EFF (36)

Monday

19:10 EFF Resigns From W3C After DRM In HTML Is Approved In Secret Vote (85)
More arrow
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.