I'd like to see an app for hacking into the Apple company store to get a half-price rebate on the iPhone and the ATT monthly lease. As much as I think it's one of the coolest things out there, I still can't justify the costs of owning such a monster.

GET IT RIGHT! Movie/music piracy is NOT theft! Theft involves taking something away from the rightful owner and depriving him or her of its use; Piracy is making a *COPY* of something without taking the original.

How much were you paid by the RIAA/MPAA to make this simple, stupid error?

It can be piracy. A copy vs. origional. I'm a musician (not associated with RIAA) and I believe it can be stealing. However, a certain number of copies should be allowed. I believe there should be a way to regulate copies...

Piracy is theft.

In this case, it is theft of Intellectual Property, which is, among other things, a person's right to profit from from his or her work.

In other words, when you pirate, say, music, you are depriving the creator of said music the ability to sell it to you. This I believe falls under your definition of theft.

I'm not taking a position for or against anyone, I am merely stating facts. One should not rationalize away facts that are inconvienient.

So when Microsoft makes it harder for netscape by bundling windows with Internet Explorer, that's anti-competitive behavior, but when Apple flat out denies access to FireFox on the iPhone, that's okay? Oh, that's right, Microsoft is the bad guy corporation and Apple is the little guy savior; I almost forgot...

Now you can reportedly able to download your desire files at higher data rates without crashing with this iphone's bittorent application.

I Love this blog

Forgive my lack of knowledge here, I don't own an iPhone, but...

While I understand Apple might not want certain applications distributed via its Apps Store, is there a technical impediment preventing distribution/installation of these apps by some other means, say a download from the developer's site?

@ Economics for Everyone!

Piracy is not theft.

what you describe is the scenario of "potential lost revenue". which is a bullcrap idea, because otherwise shop owners the world over would be suing people for not coming into the store and purchasing.

making a copy of something you weren't going to buy anyway does NOT deprive the artist.
the artist would have made nothing either way.

nothing is being stolen, no revenue is being eaten into. the only thing that HAS been done is the "ownage rights" of the object in question have been violated.

someone acquires a copy of something that they weren't going to buy. the artist is violated in their desired way the user acquired the copy.
------------------
you say :
"in other words, when you pirate, say, music, you are depriving the creator of said music the ability to sell it to you. This I believe falls under your definition of theft."
--------------------------------

the person making a copy is not depriving the artist of the ability to sell it to them, the user had the option to buy, declined the price, then decided to copy it.

the artist had his chance of payment and was declined. no theft there. simply choice.

Yes this is Amurrca jack aze....
And to the people that think Piracy is not theft....FRAK OFF. You come up with an idea that is going to make you a million and it only makes you a thousand...you will be screeming for the piracy laws to be enforced...
And since this is AMERICA, just because you can doesn't mean you should. You still have a moral obligation to do/be good. Find a way to word the law to make it feel good in your head if you like, your still a piece of sh_t.
Sleep well......

Copying becomes piracy when you give it away or sell it. It's an easy concept. If you weren't going to buy it anyway, then leave it alone, you don't need it and won't miss it.

Just because someone gets stuff via piracy, that does not mean they will not buy a legal copy at some point.

For example, I live in England and when series I like are showing in the US I download it.
But after a few months when they finally play here I still watch it, and if I really like it when they appear on DVD I also buy a copy, even tough I had a pirate version on my PC.

wow...I'm really surprised (I don't know why) at how many people try to rationalize the illegal act of downloading music / movies without paying for them. It's illegal, folks...like it or not.

I do it every day, but I KNOW it's wrong. I choose to do it anyway. I don't rationalize it with some allegedly "legal" double-talk.

An artist owns his/her copyright, which is the "right" to profit from "copies". If we deprive artists of profit for their work, then artists will produce less and society as a whole will be diminished by having less art and fewer ideas [ie. controversial art sparks spirited conversation]. To say that piracy is not theft is BS. Ultimately, pirates eat away at the fabric of our culture and the quality of our lives. A profitable Hollywood puts out more movies, and a profitable music industry puts out more music. Take away profit, and you take away motivation. Pirates think they are so clever, but if we ever end up in a world with no artists then every pirate should be shot!

Ok people, "Pirates" use boats and guns to kill people and take their property. eg Somalia
People who download music/movies/etc are "copyright infringers" and that is not a crime. Profiting from said downloading is. This is why the RIAA/MPAA is suing people, because it is NOT illegal. If it was illegal, then people would be getting arrested, not sued. The only ones arrested, are the one profiting from it. Not the average user.
Secondly, all you railing against downloading need to check your facts. There are many studies out now that show that downloaders buy MORE music and movies than people who don't download. Thats right, artists make MORE money when people download their stuff. Stop trying to blame downloading for putting out a weak product. More people are downloading than ever before, and yet, the movie and music industries continue to set record profits year after year. Where is the damage? You cannot equate a download with a lost sale, it just isn't true, and the more you fight the internet and technology the more money you will lose in the end. Again, show me the loss of profits. Show me how this is hurting the industries. You can't, because it is not. You are buying in to the propaganda and FUD of the industries.

Although I do own an iPod, simply because I believe there isn't a better portable digital media player on the market, I think Apple needs to burn in there elitist, self serving, holier than thou hell. Why the hell would I pay $1000 for a laptop when I can spend twice as much for and Mac book with the same computing power? Oh, I know, because it's got that cool light up apple on it and that will make me popular and cool and better than those around me, it'll also make you a douche bag too.
"Apple, because nut swingers need computers too"

Oh, and those of you that are intersted in the iBoobs app, there's a 3rd part app called Wobble that let's you use your own pics to get the same effect, just Google it, that is unless you can't use Google on your iPhone as well.

While I may not agree with downloading copyrighted material myself , the idea that "If we deprive artists of profit for their work, then artists will produce less and society as a whole will be diminished by having less art and fewer ideas [ie. controversial art sparks spirited conversation]" is silly .. Under this rationale no art or innovation would ever exist. This is the rational that is supposedly used to justify Copyright and Patent law . However this rationale has consistently been demonstrated as untrue . This premise is only true to the the extent that if large corporations (who own most of the rights and earn most of the profit from these recordings) refused to publish the work maybee there would be fewer artist. But in this day and age large record companies are becoming less and less relevant. Artist can record and distribute their albums without ever needing a major record label. The record companies are attempting to utilize the legal system to maintain their monopoly. This pattern has been repeated throughout history and will continue until the end of time. Every major technological advance has involved the leading monopoly lobbying legislatures to pass legislation to protect their interest.
Take away profit take away motive !!! what kind of crack are you smoking. That's not the only reason why people entertain themselves. Give me a break!!!. You obviously don't know any artist. Cause if any artist tells you that is there sole motivation for creating.. they need to quit.

Duplication of Intellectual Property without permission is probably wrong. It is certainly illegal. But it has neither the property of inflating the cost of the original due to reduction in supply, nor does it deprive someone of a material good while giving it to another.

It is not theft, arguing that it deprives someone of the potential to make money, is merely conjecture and not based in reality. One could make the same argument about offering free software alternatives. It certainly deprives the maker of a potential sale. The only difference is that no ones copyright was violated. So that argument is quite simply BS.

The issue with "piracy" is illegal duplication, nothing more. If some profit was made on from the duplication, like the unauthorized sale of someone else's intellectual property, we might be able to argue that that is equivalent to theft. But even this is unauthorized sale, not theft. It might even be worse then theft, I think it is.

Theft of intellectual property is when a person claims authorship of another's work. This is theft of credit. This is often refered to as plagiarizing though.

You see we have a language that's capable of expressing exactly what you mean. There is no reason, other then to warp other people's thinking, to use language that has meaning other then what you intend to convey.

Software, music, etc. "piracy" is probably immoral, certainly a violation of implicit or explicit contract, definitely illegal, but is not and never will be theft. If you are going to call it theft, you might as well call arson theft. It fits just as well.

Hello. PLEASE stop USING caps to SHOW that you are SERIOUS with your POST. Write like adults and have a serious conversation for once. Oh yeah, great blog. :)

Everyone is going on & on about piracy.. i thought the real topic of conversation on this article would be the denial of FireFox & Flash Lite... there is no reason for Apple to deny these apps other than to be anti-competitive & maintain their dictatorial oligarchy.

If I take a CD from a store and use it personally and don't sell it, is this still considered stealing?

Apple is the only one that allows leniency for such "backups". Before when you had a music CD and wanted to give out copies to friends, that was illegal. Now with the iTunes DRM Free songs, you can also do the same, but at least the information for the original purchaser will be permanently in there and the authorities can go directly to that person. My point of view is that Apple has addressed this far better than any other music provider. Go iTunes!

OK everyone i checked the updated 2009 lawbooks and piracy is not considerd a crime unless sold, advertised, or displayd publicy. This means you can copy a dvd as long as you don't turn your driveway into a drive-in theatre and show it, But some movie and song produces are makeing it unlawful to copy their works. WHY NOT JUST BUY THE DVD OR CD! WE ARE NOT POOR!

so who will make a shaking dick application now? .. no nudity, though. .. just for girls' fun

ok so every one here is bet up about music "piracy"

if you are an artist either self distrubted or signed to a label (small and indie) people can affected your sales and cost you money bu at the same time most of the people that "stole" your music never heard about you and never would see you. (<that last symbol after the u was a period it means end of statement meaning there is not counter argument)
now.. if your signed to a large label they take most of the money any ways from your record sales in return they offer massive commissions and promotions but your see about a nickle on ever cd sold (and yes even if it's digi they still manage to take that much)
so you ask where do pop stars make there money?
touring
still just like 20 years ago when it really all came into play most artist make there money touring any " artist " that claims different is just ass sore that no one wants to buy your music

if your stealing or reducing profits from any one it's generally larger record companies

the only thing i hate is the death of the medium where you know records hate posters and other extras and cd's had 20 page books of art

i make music and i d.j. i get monies my leaving my city and state i get gigs by kids in bad water nowhere booking me because they heard my music i get to leave home and pay rent on there dime the blog culture has facilitated this if i can put a record out i do people may or may not buy it but the only money you really make on albums are the one you either get or buy back from the label your signed to if your signed ( that's right you buy your own music back from the record company so you can sell it at shows)

now why in the word the iphone can't run flash still boggles my mind it's every where

Those are all really cool, but where can I get the boobs app?

@ average human

I think you'll actually find this is The _Internet_ ...or _World_Wide_Web_ (depending on your preference).

America is a country.

The Web, on the other hand is an worldwide-spanning communications system invented of a Brit, while working in Switzerland, and developed by the international scientific research community.

While this might surprise you, I have even more shocking news - over here, _outside_ of the USA, we also have electricity, running water, computers, television, trains, and ethics.

But it appears we are somewhat better at using some of those than yourself personally, particularly the 'being able to express ourselves without dropping to groundless insults in debates', and that pesky ethics thing.

I hope you'll learn someday that being ethical and reasonable is something all humans should be as a matter of course, if they wish the same regard from everyone else and to live in a pleasant world. And that this is preferable to blindly following edicts from the leaders of their respective tribe and threats of force from cultural warlords.