MegaUpload shut down, founder arrested

[abu nuwas]

MegaUpload was taken down because they got greedy. File-sharing isn't about making millions by selling that which you did not create- it's about sharing what you've bought with others. In this way, those that cannot afford the culture of entertainment may still experience it and those that only afford a small slice of it can share what they have and enjoy everyone else's slice too. MegaUpload was also the source for artists to share their original content with the online public for free (while being paid for hits) so it was a win-win situation- that was not good enough for Kim Dotcom. He and his cohorts could've made a lot of money with that strategy, but they got greedy and careless . . . Hopefully someone else will take that strategy and keep it clean.

I do not see that making use of electronic gadgetry makes a thief any less of a thief.

If I stole your car, I'm a thief. If I were somehow able to copy your car and leave your original alone I would be a genius. This is file-sharing: the work of the very intelligent to share entertainment of all kinds.

Let's just say that all musicians gave away their music . . . would they all go broke? No. Artists spend a lot of money in production of CDs, but get very little return for their investments. They get a much greater portion of their earnings from concerts, T-shirts (and other tangible merchandise) and radio play. These things would be left untouched and artists (and not labels) would still survive.

All information should be free. Period.

And how will it be, when all music and books are available by nefarious means, for no payment?

Why does it have to be nefarious? What if all information were immediately available for free? Wouldn't create a greater audience for the author of the work? Isn't that what it's all about? When did literature become about making a buck? It's sad to me that people can't see that the greatest reward isn't money- it's about touching the most people.

If someone writes a book and gives it away and millions read it then they will undoubtedly get book signings, TV show interviews, sponsorships, TV host offers, writing jobs for TV and cinema, etc . . . the list goes on and on. Who makes a lot of money being a poet these days anyway . . . I mean really?

(All of the above flew out of me very quickly, but I mean no disrespect to anyone. )

We live in an age where information is all. The Law relating to Intellectual Property is there to protect that information. If an American scientist works out how to make a plane, or ship, invisible, that information has value, and belongs to him, or his employers. It does not belong to, say, the Chinese, who have been practising wholesale industrial espionage on your country for such commercial secrets. The fact that the US can still build stealth aircaft, does not mean that they have not lost something, and that something has been stolen. I see no difference.

"File-sharing" seems to cover the legitimate, where you might share something you had created, or to which you had a right, and the illegitimate, where I perhaps, obtain a song by buying it, and then, with no right to the copyright, share with limitless numbers of people. I do not see why an artist should be forced to traipse around, just because others are too mean to buy what he has created. Then again, it's mighty handy....