Amazon.com Widgets

Should unregulated distribution of copyrighted works over Internet be allowed?

  • Copyrights are just some fascist attempts by corporations to control the media and make mone

    Sorry, I just cannot support any copyrights. First off, its not stealing, as copyrighted material is just an attempt to claim ownership on intangible items, not to help the artists, but to help the copyright holders make money. They exist just to own, while doing no work, and therefore deserve no protection. But some of the idiot sheeple who said no still seem to buy into government lies about theft. No, artists get no credit for their work, just idiot bureaucrats who get the government to penalize anyone who does not pay them for stuff that is not rightfully theirs.

  • Music and spending money unnecessarily

    Im not going to spent money on a band, or artist i don't even know if i like, id rather go on youtube and listen to them to decide that, then download it, legally or not. Then being able to listen to a whole album or two id probably want top see them live if they ever cane near me, spending probably $50 on the ticket and $25 on a t-shirt. I know im not the only one too, man people who are willing to down load music illegally are more willing to spend more on seeing them, merch, and possibly meeting them.

  • Yes, the distribution of copyrighted works over the Internet should be allowed because no one has ownership rights to the Internet.

    The Internet is like international waters, a dead zone for laws. No government has any legal rights over it, and actions like those by American president Bush to tap into the Internet for their own use were illegal and wrong. It is up to the companies themselves to protect their own copyrighted material; if they don't want to put time and money to make it hard to copy their works that is their problem. The Internet is not some little library computer network; no one owns it in it's entirety and no country has legal rights to try monitor and filter it yet. If the government gets the rights to do what they please in regards to copyrighted content there will always be the question of what is next.

    Posted by: H_Baird
  • I agree that unregulated distribution of copyrighted materials over the internet should be allowed.

    The government should allow the unregulated distribution of copyrighted works over the internet. It already happens everyday. I feel like money is being wasted on something that is never going to stop. No matter how many times they sue people, there will always be someone doing it somewhere else.

    Posted by: barbiegirll
  • Music and spending money unnecessarily

    Im not going to spent money on a band, or artist i don't even know if i like, id rather go on youtube and listen to them to decide that, then download it, legally or not. Then being able to listen to a whole album or two id probably want top see them live if they ever cane near me, spending probably $50 on the ticket and $25 on a t-shirt. I know im not the only one too, man people who are willing to down load music illegally are more willing to spend more on seeing them, merch, and possibly meeting them.

  • This is a great resource leave it alone

    The internet helps us gather info, research, etc. It works so why do you want to change it? Leave well enough alone and let the information flow. Information is knowledge and knowledge is power. So what is wrong with sharing the power to the masses? Leave it alone please.

  • The author has a right to restrict his or her work to those who buy it, and this right must not be taken away.

    It should not be allowed because artists have a right to prevent the piracy of their work. This is called copyright. If we allow the artists' work to be freely distributed, the author's copyright protection will be more easily broken. Copyright promotes innovation in our nation, and is the thing that prevents copying. Copyright forces authors to create, and not copy. If the author consents to his/her work being distributed, then it is fine, but work cannot be distributed without the author's consent.

  • A person's intellectual property needs protection, even on the Internet.

    I love to read books and would love to read a book on the Internet. But, I recognize that the author and publisher have a right to be compensated for their work. Copyrights are a protection for intellectual property. The Internet should respect those safeguards.

    Posted by: ddeathnote
  • Violating copyright is stealing, and stealing is wrong, whether online or in the ordinary world.

    Copyrighted works, like books, plays or music, belong to the person who created them, which is recognized in law by nearly all civilized societies. And, that person controls the right to make money by selling or distributing their property. Just because the Internet makes it easier to steal someone's property virtually, more than it would be to go to their house and steal their TV, it doesn't make stealing from artists and authors right. This is not a victimless crime. Someone's family is suffering when we steal online.

    Posted by: R3yGoobIe
  • No, because it is wrong to encourage piracy on the Internet.

    With a rampant surge of MP3 torrents and the risk of literature being pirated, we face a tremendous plunge in market sales, which could hamper an artist's life ten-fold.

    Posted by: NumberlessClemente63
  • The copyright law protects works and should be obeyed. Unregulated distribution of copyrighted works is wrong.

    I have seen Internet piracy and file sharing completely change the music business and not for the better. Many people do not value copyrights. They believe that everything should be free and at their fingertips. The problem with this thinking is that people will not be able to make a living any more writing music, books, or films if they are distributed freely and unregulated. Just think what would happen to grocery stores if we could just walk in and take whatever we wanted without paying for it?

    Posted by: SilentIgnacio
  • What is the value of a copyright if you can use something without concern for it?

    The reason why people obtain a copyright for something is so that it will be protected for them. Copyrights are generally designed to allow people to make money off of something they have created or invented. If there is free access to these things online then there is no point in obtaining a copyright because it has no value.

    Posted by: MariaR
  • Unregulated distribution of copyrighted works over the Internet should not be allowed, because it is an infringement of the copyright.

    Overall, there should be a lot more regulation put on anything that is posted on the Internet. This ranges from unauthorized publishing of pictures to distribution of copyrighted works. Looking in particular at copyrighted works, this is obviously an illegal thing, as it is infringing on the copyright that was put in place on the work.

    Posted by: eyeslikethat
  • Distribution of copyrighted works over the Internet is not different from any other outlet for copyrighted works and should be regulated the same way.

    The Internet is simply another social outlet for copyrighted materials and should be regulated the same way it is in the physical world. The only exception should be when it's for educational and learning purposes, which should be verified beforehand.

    Posted by: BrianDj

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.