Freedom of information

After reading a couple of topics about TBP and watching the video, I wanted to find out who of you, who believe that information should be distributed freely, distributes 100% of the information created by the public itself and for free? Did you personally write theses, course projects? I hope they wrote and then distributed them to the whole stream? Yes? And the whole thread put their names and initials in your work? Or did you make an author's movie and share it with your friends and forgive them to share with your friends? Or maybe you wrote poems for your beloved and then laid them out on the net so that others could read them to their beloved? Or do you play in a small group and upload the recorded albums to the network and give free concerts allowing audio and video recording?

If you answered “yes” to at least one question, you may have done a good job, and perhaps not, but I would like to talk with those who answered “no” - you do not distinguish between labor and information, which is difficult to separate in the information age .

By supporters of TBP in this text, I mean people advocating the free and unhindered dissemination of information. I also support this idea, but I do not see any real factors hindering the dissemination of information, and therefore I see no point in your actions / protests

I am very interested to listen to what the TPB supporters say in their interviews and how they do it. The guy in the interview very well omitted some words and therefore half-truth in principle is convincing for a person who is not very in the subject, it is clear that the speech has been delivered, and this means that the person is fascinated by what he is talking about or the speech is rehearsed. Let me, from my point of view, a person is not right, and we are talking about some abstract information and abstract infringement of rights, but the fact that he is trying to contact the authorities is five. So about this action - see how much it copied the "information" in the form of cliparts / images and how "presentable" this initiative looks. I also wonder how legal the tracks for which they tried to dissolve dnstep and tectonics (which even doesn’t draw even amateur level) are legal? And although they could either agitate talented dancers / artists / DJs, in general, someone of the tech in our time creates this information so beloved by everyone, or to create it yourself, at an acceptable level, and not “stick-stick-agurec- right-and-come-out, human, ”since there is someone to agitate, for example, I recently learned that there is a“ You are interesting ”person in LiveJournal, very talented, and no one prohibits this person from disseminating information, even strange, yes? Or not?
')

Show what you have to distribute

And I'm even more than sure that no one from the protesters wants to create information always for nothing. For some reason, those who create and distribute cannot be heard, and they are forbidden, for example, author cinema and music on torrents.ru, and if you replicate this information, no one will be against it, and the creators of this information will express gratitude. But I think that they are motivated not by the principles of disseminating information for the Droma, and not by the opportunity to conduct an advertising campaign. Yes, there are exceptions. It becomes more popular among musicians, but they are fed not by the circulation of records, but by concerts, which one should not forget.

Information can not be spread without creating it.

Here, for example, you are not indignant when there is a price for copying information in museums and similar establishments - for photo and video shooting? I'm not outraged. I paid 10 rubles and at least dispose of.

Also, no one bothers to get exclusive rights to the album / program / film and replicate it as you like? Yes, everyone is accustomed to that for this nothing ever happens to anyone, but you must feel that this is not good. Why does everyone immediately forget that this information belongs to someone? Why do not you respect the person who created the information?

When you are not given the opportunity to disseminate information?

Most of us listen to radio - radio is also a way to disseminate information, so only many of you thought that each track broadcast on the radio is the very concept for which you are fighting? And who thought about the fact that the copyright holder is notified that this or that track will be played on the air? And also about what is paid for it? And no one interferes with the work of radio stations? And they spread information directly in space, that is, they have already achieved what you are trying to achieve.

I would also like to note the fact that distribution is not always good. For example, someone writes a song and shows it to friends, and it becomes a work of art, and then it begins to be distributed. Mobile calls / advertising inserts / on each radio station it is twisted and as a result, the track turns into UG.

If this problem is really close to you - try to look at it from the opposite side. Create “information”, really good and high-quality information, for example, film the work of your favorite author. Find a team of enthusiasts and after twenty months share your information, the original of your film adaptation will remain forever with you and it will be replicated by millions of people, along the way, some of them will tell you, it is very convincing that shit is a bullet much better than you are the director, but alas you never you will not know, since you will be busy with a bunch of other problems - to pay for the work of the team, materials, etc. You expected to collect a large ticket office, but in the end your movie did not even pay for itself, because people did not go to the cinema, but watched it at home, and not buying a DVD, but downloading it. And by doing this you harm yourself, you press paltos for a morning session in a cinema 50 meters from the house, and as a result you get a pof, but Nashar.

We deprive ourselves of the opportunity to enjoy quality things, and confuse the concepts of labor and information. Information should be free, labor should be paid.

For example, "Inhabited Island"

* Budget: $ 36,500,000
* Cash fees in Russia: $ 19,275,214 (as of January 25, 2009)

The loss of profits due to the free dissemination of information only with the help of torrents.ru is more than 10 million rubles (roughly rounded down), which is about one and a half percent of the non-paid part of the budget. Actually, thanks to the principles of freedom of information, the cinema has not paid off (other bittorrent networks, ed2k, counterfeit) and for this reason the team may not have been able to remove the film adaptation of the Genome or the Competitors, and the level would allow.

If you are not ready to pay for work, do not use its fruits.

And I would like to see a precedent when information was not allowed to be distributed - the seizure of the television center / radio studios during coups in the country is not accepted, as this is not from this opera, censorship again is not what you are protesting against.