1366
Don't let the corporations tell you otherwise
(lemmy.ohaa.xyz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2024
1366 points (95.7% liked)
memes
10412 readers
886 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
You can keep your derogatory language to yourself.
I‘m saying if you buy a song, movie, art piece It is yours to do with as you please, forever.
Thats what buying means.
You have to buy it (the rights for music or movie) to do as you please in an unlimited fashion, not buy a COPY of it. Otherwise it's personal use only.
Sorry if that's too subtle to grasp.
You're making an irrelevant distinction here. If you buy a CD with a song on it, do you buy the rights to the song? Or a copy?
A copy, right? You own a copy. The music corporation isn't going to show up one day and repo your CD because of X, Y, Z reason. You have unlimited personal use of the copy. Not the rights to the whole song, but just the copy. You can play it in your car. You can play it in your walkman. You can loan it to a friend.
But when you buy a digital copy, your ownership rights are dependent on them. It's more like a lease with terms subject to change whenever the lessor wants, like because they got bought out or they lost the distribution rights or most commonly through pure incompetent inability to maintain the systems that they require you to use in order for you to use your copy.
It's almost impossible to just buy a .wav of a song anymore. Now when you "buy" a song it has a ton of restrictions on it, any one of which could prevent you from playing it. You can't loan it to a friend. You can't play it on a different device unless you log in to their systems. Sometimes you just lose access to it forever with no recourse.
That's what this post is about. Ownership of the copy, not the rights to the original. Literally no one is talking about the rights to the original. You just brought it up out of nowhere.
No youre bringing stuff up, read back. OP said a cd, not a digital copy. And when you buy a cd, you own a copy not rights. You can't play the CD as part of your election campaign, or make it your eHitler Minecraft theme and publish it on YouTube. There are terms of use by which you must abide. OP said you buy it you own it and you do whatever you want and that is patently false for a CD which is their example not mine.
If you want to talk about digital copies that is different in some ways you describe, but I. No world do you buy a copy of a song and have unlimited permission to do whatever you want
I specifically said "personal use". Anything within personal use is fair game when you buy a CD. So no election campaigns, no selling it yourself. Personal use. That's EXTREMELY different from a digital item that can poof at any time.
And again, stop bringing up rights. No one is talking about rights to media. Totally different thing.
And haui, who I was replying to when you inserted yourself, specifically said a CD first and buy means buy. Did you not go back and see what you're replying to? You jumped into a thread between two other people and youre making it about you.
Again. Fucking REREAD IT and stop being a twit. Your point is valid for personal use but that was literally never at issue.
Friendo, I don't know where you're from, but I've never heard of a place where "I'm going to buy a Big Mac" means "I'm going to purchase the rights to the Big Mac". You misinterpreted them, possibly on purpose.
How do you read:
Friendo? It's the wrong way. Because that perspective is misconstruing Ownership (ahem rights) and ownership.
You're in the wrong conversation. Possibly on purpose.
"No u" is a fun argument because it's usually what people resort to when they've realized they're wrong but don't want to admit it.
Give me one example, ever, where the phrase "to buy" in comman usage means to purchase the rights (as in copyright etc) to something. If I say I'm buying a Dodge Charger, I'm not contacting the lawyers of Dodge to try to buy the intellectual property associated with the Charger brand. I'm buying a car. I could give infinity examples here, and it's unnecessary because it's so damn obvious.
If I purchase a Big Mac, it is mine to do with as I please, forever (or for as long as it lasts). I can put a funny hat on it. I can throw it at a tree. I can feed it to my pig. I can attach it to a drone and launch it into the ocean. It is my Big Mac. I have not purchased the rights to the term "Big Mac", or the recipe, or the patent on the secret sauce. I have purchased one physical Big Mac.
Duh.
Just take the L dude, either English is your second language or you had a massive brain fart and you interpreted someone else's words in a ridiculous fashion.
Jesus Christ, read back like I said or finish high school then reply. The dip shit I replied to said you own a CD and you can do what you want and that isn't true for all the reasons YOU YOURELF have already articulated
Buy a big mac and shove it in the muffler of a Dodge charger or up your own ass IDC if you own it or not your are literally making anyone reading this thread dumber.
So here, of you speak fluent "comman" go ahead and quote me the top level comment and tell me in good faith that you think they mean "big mac in a hat" CD usage and not "I can make this the soundtrack to my direct to DVD porno" usage and I will stop replying.
Otherwise I will happily reply "dumbass" your comments every day until I fucking die or you shut up. Test me.
Already did that, but knock yourself out
Dumbass
As I said, thats the legal definition. Slavery used to be legal, abortion is illegal in many places.
I dont care about your definition of right and wrong. If I buy something, it is mine.
Blocked for repeated derogatory language.
Without a legal system and legal definitions, your claim of ownership doesn't mean anything, rendering your entire argument pointless.
Now we‘re dogpiling. Nice.
Nobody said we dont need a legal system. I say legal does not define what is „right“.
Only what is legal is at issue. What is right has nothing to do with what you can do or can't in the eyes of the law.
Bye dummy!