By that logic you can't blame the politicians because they got bribed, and you can't blame the citizens because of corporate propaganda and voila! No one has moral responsibility for anything
Politicians' fiduciaries are their constituents though, so they are the failure there though if they allow corporations to get away with long term harm
I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for some abstract shame or morality to guide politicians' actions when all the systemic incentives point in the other direction
But the creator can't afford a bike now that you copied instead of buying. So kinda bad analogy.
I pirate because it's more convenience than having 10+ separate streaming apps, but I also don't pretend that the monetary losses from piracy don't trickle down.
I just don't care. Offer me a good service please, and I'll pay.
Sometimes it’s really hard to do that though. Like, with most Japanese animation studios you can only buy cels from their site, it’s often all in Japanese and some studios don’t even have that.
Between marketing, producers, distribution and everything it’s become pretty damn hard to actually give the money to who you want.
It does. The streaming services won't order more seasons etc if ratings are shit. That new season is lots of money for the people working, from set hands to camera men, writers etc.
That said, I've not subscribed to any service since 2013 because none works like, say, Spotify.
Netflix, in particular, won't order more seasons if the show didn't get them more users. They don't care about popularity itself. The shows are supposed to get more people to subscribe. Which is stupid. I've honestly never heard of anyone subbing to Netflix for one show.
If I steal food from the store, I'm both robbing the store, and a community that would have paid good money for that food.
If I go to the store and magically have the items on the shelves be duplicated into my cart, and I don't have to pay for them. That is not a crime that is a miracle
Just a few days ago I was re-reading the Restaurant at the end of the universe, and was going to try and look up this quote before reading the comments. I've really got to get around to reading the rest of the books by Douglas Adams, as I loved his hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy series.
If I were asked to answer the following question: What is slavery? and I should answer in one word, It is murder!, my meaning would be understood at once. No extended argument would be required to show that the power to remove a man's mind, will, and personality, is the power of life and death, and that it makes a man a slave. It is murder. Why, then, to this other question: What is property? may I not likewise answer, It is robbery!, without the certainty of being misunderstood; the second proposition being no other than a transformation of the first?
Funny how the word license never comes up until you read the fine print. Colloquially you're buying the product. If we're going by legal technicalities then legally I ain't stealing shit.
Services like massages are paying directly for someone's active labor, buying a book, a song, or an (offline) game is one a time transaction for an already completed work
What you're paying for when there's a license or other kind of agreement is more akin to a service. Like permission to use it, renting it. Paying for labor is just renting someone's body and skills. The seller making the offer gets to determine the terms, and then you have just as much power to walk away.
yup. anti-piracy is about control, not profits. this is trivial to deduce from the simple fact that no one ever measures a drm solution's performance in total sales recovered, they only ever whine about hypothetical lost ones, which is the corporate equivalent of sideways for attention, long way for effect
I can't wait to see the split in the next decade or so between AI films from the giants and boutique offerings that feature all-human casts.
In sure the former will be dazzling crap/profit machines, and the latter to be a slow death as people begin to come of age without any particular desire to watch real people when they can see the craziest shit created using AI. I wonder how long before the CGI will be so good that it will become impossible to tell the difference? I wonder how long before you can tailor the characters in a movie like you can tailor your own game avatars? How long before piracy isn't stealing IP but actually creating your own versions of movies that can riff of the original and even improve upon them, creating a subculture of film creators that are hunted and aggressively prosecuted by the major content creators?
I'm a bit apprehensive about that world, but it's exciting to be on the cusp of such a potential reorganizing of the film world we know.
"Don't like a dark skinned Ariel? Here at Disney+++ you can configure your movie to have the ethnicity and sexuality you want to see, for just $49.99 per month extra"
I do Wonder, if we possible for me to one day tell an AI that I want a CGI pornographic movie about furry transformation and breast expansion. With a story even, because I know I'm sure as hell not getting that from Hollywood. And I don't just mean a scene that make cater to that, I want the movie to be specifically about that
read the linked text if you are interested in debating me 😁😂🤣😅
I am not gonna make the same argument but worse than proudhon
if you don't care or have time or attention span for that but then you probably shouldn't say it's bullshit without knowing what you are talking about 😘
No. The first argument is that the author can equate slavery to murder without being misunderstood. They then expound further on that meaning. They say nothing about wages.
The second argument says that in contrast one cannot equate property to robbery without being grossly misunderstood, which you have so eloquently demonstrated.
No, it is from a 19th century socialist, this sort of language isn't easily understood by most people in the modern day. And to act like it should be so insightful to them is sophistry.
I'm not taking offense that they didn't understand the argument. I'm taking offense that they openly admitted to not reading it, and then attempting to summarize what it said, poorly. If that's sophistry, so be it. They're being willfully ignorant.
A line break or paragraphs or literally any formatting at all would have helped. I suspect it's an artifact of how the full quote was done as the link, though.
In a world where people’s lives are sustained by a model that diminishes their income when copying instead of buying, you can’t exactly call it “perfectly ethical”.
You can make an argument that your copying isn’t preventing a sale and that probably works most of the time, but not all the time.
I think “it’s complicated” is a more true statement of the conundrum.
The issue is that there exists some sort of digital Bourgeoisie, people that just make their money by owning digital data, while the digital proletariat, the artists and programmers, that creates the data aren't well financially compensated or might not even be employed at the company anymore.
Pirates should be mindful who they are hurting, and that depends on the piece of work they are pirating, the time when they are doing it and many other circumstances. That decides if is ethical or not.
Creators should be well compensated for their time and effort, so that they continue to create and if that is the case piracy doesn't matter.
Self published indie game that you really like? Pay for it, support the creator(s)
Music written/recorded by long dead people whose rights are owned by some massive faceless corporation to line the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? Fuck them, pirate away
Future generations will cringe at how much creative innovation has been stifled by our repressive copyright laws, extending it past 20 years flat was a major mistake
when it was black music or achievements, where were those property rights then? chuck berry was robbed, so were many others. Where was the outrage then? seems to me property is only respected if it comes to the belongings of those in power, but if you are a native american your entire country is up for grabs... how come?
The actual damage is done to the billions of people that are excluded from education, from science and from just books, by property and copy rights. The damage done to mankind done by patent law far exceeds any damage done to individuals holding patents.
We artificially live in a world that is less educated than it could be. I would like to live in the world with the most possible education.
Think about who is damaged by our lack of education?
think about who benefits from our ignorance?
Who's interests outweigh the ability of all of mankind to educate themselves? Our taxes paid for the science, the articles should be gratis.
The artificial scarcity around books, science and generally information and education is affecting the trajectory of mankind.
If all had free access to all information meaning scientific papers, books, plays, literature, musical scores and recordings, then we may have already lived in a start trek style utopia.
How much has mankind's advancement already been hampered by the sorry state of affairs?
In case you or anyone else is curious, it's a reaction gif of Will Ferrell as Ron Burgundy from Anchorman saying, "I can't argue with any of those points."
Meh, piracy wouldn't equal stealing even if buying did mean owning. Piracy is duplicating without removing the original and doesn't take away any existing thing from the current owner. I count potential sells as a hypothetical thing that doesn't currently exist. Therefore, piracy is nothing even close to stealing.
They really aren't. The labor that went into it is already paid in full, even if what the labor created earns for another 20 years, that labor won't see another dime for it. Can't steal what isn't there
It can happen in artistic fields like acting and game dev.
Fun fact: In game dev, at least, your initial payment to make a game is typically an advance on the share of the profits you'll get. So terms like "$100k to start and then 10%" function more like "10% to a minimum of $100k" in the long term.
The boss pays me for my time, I'm never getting that time back so I've sold it and they own it, in fact, they even get to keep the work I produced during that time to go with it.
Sure, a court would charge you with different crimes, but the concept is the concept and a forum post is not court.
I prayed shit all the time when I couldn't afford it. When I got money, I eventually rebuilt a lot of those games for convenience's sake. Comics, not so much, but I have thousands upon thousands of them.
I did it because I couldn't afford it. If you take something that is being sold, without paying for it, how is that concept not stealing?
Someone is selling something I want. I either can't, or don't want to, pay for it, so I just take it. What's the morality there?
Not sure why you need this spelled out. There are varying degrees of "wrong." They're still all on one side of the spectrum.
I support piracy the same way I support shoplifting of certain goods - it's a social subsidy for poor people because we as a society don't guarantee enough spending power.
Well that and the generally ethical piracy of archival/illegal distribution to overcome laws.
I'm not exactly against piracy but I don't see it as morally good. If anything I see it in the same way Gabe Newell sees piracy. It's not a good or bad force but rather a sort of force of human nature that comes about when companies can't make a decent service. The only way to kill piracy is by making a user experience that is better than constantly searching for torrents. You need a decent platform that people are willing to pay for. Enshitification is basically a summoning circle for pirates. Sirusly covering your platform with scam ads is just gonna make demand for ad blockers. Not selling old games at all is just gonna make demand for emulators. Charging $50 dollars for a text book is just gonna make demand for a PDF scans. It's crap like that that makes me consider piracy good and a necessity today.
You want your generalized term (barking) to be the central point then narrow to your difference (different barks).
Yours set the broad precedent of heat/fire being hot (theft being wrong) but not all heat being fire. I understood your intent, but what you're literally saying here is that not all theft is piracy, which is true but irrelevant.
I mean, it's not
It's piracy, a different crime
A crime I love committing babyyyyyyyyyy
We here at Futurama do not condone the cool crime of burglary.
Yeah, when you steal something from someone then he does not have it anymore. With indefinitely replicable virtual goods that is not the case.
They have to recoup and make roi on their r&d
.... therefore we need to build and violently enforce a legal regime to ensure that content profiteers can extract 100% profit from every transaction?
I don't make the rules. Blame shareholder fiduciary responsibilities or the spineless politicians. Corporations are gonna corporate
By that logic you can't blame the politicians because they got bribed, and you can't blame the citizens because of corporate propaganda and voila! No one has moral responsibility for anything
Politicians' fiduciaries are their constituents though, so they are the failure there though if they allow corporations to get away with long term harm
I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for some abstract shame or morality to guide politicians' actions when all the systemic incentives point in the other direction
If I steal your bicycle
you have to take the bus,
but if I just copy it
there's one for each of us!
im a bicycle store owner and this is so true
I like to think this implies that people are coming into your store and cloning the bicycles
You wouldn't download a bicycle would you?
I absolutely would.
Call me Missingno. Cuz I would have 99 of them shits
It's probably possible nowadays!
No, but I would steal a car (and then trade it for a bicycle) (I can't drive lmao)
And if I do neither, I have to take the bus
So it's all yet another conspiracy by big bus
Normal busses are pretty big, so big bus must be very big
Is that the Universal Serial Bus?
No actually, that one's quite small
How small are we talking? Mini? Micro?
But the creator can't afford a bike now that you copied instead of buying. So kinda bad analogy.
I pirate because it's more convenience than having 10+ separate streaming apps, but I also don't pretend that the monetary losses from piracy don't trickle down.
I just don't care. Offer me a good service please, and I'll pay.
You can support creative people directly. Acting like the money paid to Netflix is trickling down to them is laughable.
Sometimes it’s really hard to do that though. Like, with most Japanese animation studios you can only buy cels from their site, it’s often all in Japanese and some studios don’t even have that.
Between marketing, producers, distribution and everything it’s become pretty damn hard to actually give the money to who you want.
It does. The streaming services won't order more seasons etc if ratings are shit. That new season is lots of money for the people working, from set hands to camera men, writers etc.
That said, I've not subscribed to any service since 2013 because none works like, say, Spotify.
Netflix, in particular, won't order more seasons if the show didn't get them more users. They don't care about popularity itself. The shows are supposed to get more people to subscribe. Which is stupid. I've honestly never heard of anyone subbing to Netflix for one show.
Exactly what I'm talking about, but some people don't realize the thing that if everyone pirates, the services stop spending money.
But it's their responsibility to make the service enticing
Streaming services notoriously won't order more seasons of shows that are popular, either. More seasons are more expensive than new shows.
If I steal food from the store, I'm both robbing the store, and a community that would have paid good money for that food.
If I go to the store and magically have the items on the shelves be duplicated into my cart, and I don't have to pay for them. That is not a crime that is a miracle
Consider this. (big chain) Stores already steal from the community via profits they make.
And while we’re on about food, look at how much the grocery stores toss out.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Theft is theft.
No, but three lefts make a right!
You are goddamn right!
Didn't ask for your meaningless sayings that do not apply to real life
Exactly true, and as applied to patents: if I steal your fish you go hungry, if I watch how you fish and do the same we both eat.
bruh
"Property is theft!" ~ EA
Just a few days ago I was re-reading the Restaurant at the end of the universe, and was going to try and look up this quote before reading the comments. I've really got to get around to reading the rest of the books by Douglas Adams, as I loved his hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy series.
The thing I love about zephod is that he was basically the "it was me. I did it like this." Meme before the Heavy is Dead video came out.
Your ship is cool and all, but I’ve trained Cruise Missiles V, so fuck your ship :D
"Fuck EA" ~ Me
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, What Is Property?
Also if buying isn't owning than wtf did I buy. In any other time period this corporate shit would be considered a scam.
"Access." It is such a scam.
You didn't buy anything, we rent now...
Landlords everywhere, even on the internet... It's disgusting. They get to own, we get to borrow...
So to OP, it's still stealing as they own everything, we just rent. Fucking scam for sure :(
Honestly, land should be considered a utility
At the risk of sounding like a landlord here, there are far wealthier people to be disgusted by.
Gates quietly buying as much arable land as he can in the world.
False dichotomy, I'm disgusted by both.
Yeah, I think it's backwards to still focus our ire on "landlords" when it's oligarch (yes, some of whom are also landlords) that are the real enemy.
In modern society, many landlords are just middle-class folks who bought an apartment building as their retirement fund.
"YoU BoUgHt a lIcEnSe tO UsE ThE PrOdUcT"
Funny how the word license never comes up until you read the fine print. Colloquially you're buying the product. If we're going by legal technicalities then legally I ain't stealing shit.
You bought the right to give them money! :D
You are renting the software forever, until it's no longer supported (I'm looking at you Nintendo)
The same thing as when you buy a movie ticket.
If you "buy" a massage you don't then own a massage. Lol. Doesn't matter what time period.
Services like massages are paying directly for someone's active labor, buying a book, a song, or an (offline) game is one a time transaction for an already completed work
What you're paying for when there's a license or other kind of agreement is more akin to a service. Like permission to use it, renting it. Paying for labor is just renting someone's body and skills. The seller making the offer gets to determine the terms, and then you have just as much power to walk away.
It's the theft of profit they don't like, they don't care if you watch it, just that you give them money for the opportunity to watch.
No, they still don't like it when I buy a copy of a video game and then pirate it as well
yup. anti-piracy is about control, not profits. this is trivial to deduce from the simple fact that no one ever measures a drm solution's performance in total sales recovered, they only ever whine about hypothetical lost ones, which is the corporate equivalent of sideways for attention, long way for effect
I think you mean "extract value"
I can't wait to see the split in the next decade or so between AI films from the giants and boutique offerings that feature all-human casts.
In sure the former will be dazzling crap/profit machines, and the latter to be a slow death as people begin to come of age without any particular desire to watch real people when they can see the craziest shit created using AI. I wonder how long before the CGI will be so good that it will become impossible to tell the difference? I wonder how long before you can tailor the characters in a movie like you can tailor your own game avatars? How long before piracy isn't stealing IP but actually creating your own versions of movies that can riff of the original and even improve upon them, creating a subculture of film creators that are hunted and aggressively prosecuted by the major content creators?
I'm a bit apprehensive about that world, but it's exciting to be on the cusp of such a potential reorganizing of the film world we know.
Holy shit that's both terrifying and intriguing.
"Don't like a dark skinned Ariel? Here at Disney+++ you can configure your movie to have the ethnicity and sexuality you want to see, for just $49.99 per month extra"
I do Wonder, if we possible for me to one day tell an AI that I want a CGI pornographic movie about furry transformation and breast expansion. With a story even, because I know I'm sure as hell not getting that from Hollywood. And I don't just mean a scene that make cater to that, I want the movie to be specifically about that
If I were asked to answer the following question: What is slavery? and I should answer in one word, It is murder, my meaning would be understood at once. No extended argument would be required to show that the power to take from a man his thought, his will, his personality, is a power of life and death; and that to enslave a man is to kill him. Why, then, to this other question: What is property! may I not likewise answer, It is robbery, without the certainty of being misunderstood; the second proposition being no other than a transformation of the first? I undertake to discuss the vital principle of our government and our institutions, property: I am in my right. I may be mistaken in the conclusion which shall result from my investigations: I am in my right. I think best to place the last thought of my book first: still am I in my right. Such an author teaches that property is a civil right, born of occupation and sanctioned by law; another maintains that it is a natural right, originating in labor, — and both of these doctrines, totally opposed as they may seem, are encouraged and applauded. I contend that neither labor, nor occupation, nor law, can create property; that it is an effect without a cause: am I censurable? But murmurs arise! Property is robbery! That is the war-cry of ’93! That is the signal of revolutions!
How do you know before you read the entire argument? 🤔
By reading some of it, I suppose.
read the linked text if you are interested in debating me 😁😂🤣😅 I am not gonna make the same argument but worse than proudhon if you don't care or have time or attention span for that but then you probably shouldn't say it's bullshit without knowing what you are talking about 😘
No. The first argument is that the author can equate slavery to murder without being misunderstood. They then expound further on that meaning. They say nothing about wages.
The second argument says that in contrast one cannot equate property to robbery without being grossly misunderstood, which you have so eloquently demonstrated.
No, it is from a 19th century socialist, this sort of language isn't easily understood by most people in the modern day. And to act like it should be so insightful to them is sophistry.
I'm not taking offense that they didn't understand the argument. I'm taking offense that they openly admitted to not reading it, and then attempting to summarize what it said, poorly. If that's sophistry, so be it. They're being willfully ignorant.
A line break or paragraphs or literally any formatting at all would have helped. I suspect it's an artifact of how the full quote was done as the link, though.
Taking a copy of an infinitely replicable resource is perfectly ethical.
In a world where people’s lives are sustained by a model that diminishes their income when copying instead of buying, you can’t exactly call it “perfectly ethical”.
You can make an argument that your copying isn’t preventing a sale and that probably works most of the time, but not all the time.
I think “it’s complicated” is a more true statement of the conundrum.
The issue is that there exists some sort of digital Bourgeoisie, people that just make their money by owning digital data, while the digital proletariat, the artists and programmers, that creates the data aren't well financially compensated or might not even be employed at the company anymore.
Pirates should be mindful who they are hurting, and that depends on the piece of work they are pirating, the time when they are doing it and many other circumstances. That decides if is ethical or not.
Creators should be well compensated for their time and effort, so that they continue to create and if that is the case piracy doesn't matter.
Self published indie game that you really like? Pay for it, support the creator(s)
Music written/recorded by long dead people whose rights are owned by some massive faceless corporation to line the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? Fuck them, pirate away
Future generations will cringe at how much creative innovation has been stifled by our repressive copyright laws, extending it past 20 years flat was a major mistake
Thanks, Disney.
We all stand on the shoulders of giants!
when it was black music or achievements, where were those property rights then? chuck berry was robbed, so were many others. Where was the outrage then? seems to me property is only respected if it comes to the belongings of those in power, but if you are a native american your entire country is up for grabs... how come?
The actual damage is done to the billions of people that are excluded from education, from science and from just books, by property and copy rights. The damage done to mankind done by patent law far exceeds any damage done to individuals holding patents.
We artificially live in a world that is less educated than it could be. I would like to live in the world with the most possible education.
Think about who is damaged by our lack of education? think about who benefits from our ignorance?
Who's interests outweigh the ability of all of mankind to educate themselves? Our taxes paid for the science, the articles should be gratis.
The artificial scarcity around books, science and generally information and education is affecting the trajectory of mankind.
If all had free access to all information meaning scientific papers, books, plays, literature, musical scores and recordings, then we may have already lived in a start trek style utopia.
How much has mankind's advancement already been hampered by the sorry state of affairs?
Ummm, actually infinity is just a pure mathematical concept that does not exist in real life 🤓
Sure infinity exists. You see it every time you go outside at night and look up.
The universe isn't infinite. It's very big but not infinite.
Idk if it's just me but that image isn't showing.
Because it’s webm and that shit can blow me.
WeBM.
Yes, yes. Everybody Poops.
In case you or anyone else is curious, it's a reaction gif of Will Ferrell as Ron Burgundy from Anchorman saying, "I can't argue with any of those points."
It's just a reaction gif (in webm format, which is probably why it's not showing for us)
Shows for me. It's a 2-second gif. Have you tried on the web?
On the Firefox instance I'm running now, it doesn't show inline in this page. But opening the context menu and "open video in new tab" works.
I see app user
Exposed
Meh, piracy wouldn't equal stealing even if buying did mean owning. Piracy is duplicating without removing the original and doesn't take away any existing thing from the current owner. I count potential sells as a hypothetical thing that doesn't currently exist. Therefore, piracy is nothing even close to stealing.
Solid point, me hearty!
Arrrr!
It's not piracy it's reclamation
oh.... his got the point
It's called a hook, but yes it is pointy.
Yep, you can shove your "licence" up there, I bought it it's mine.
I've seen it ubder recent Rossmann's video
Rossman is goated as fuck.
Surprisingly astute point.
Terms of Service would like to speak with you.
ToC wielding guns we just wanna talk!
What is renting?
Can I get Bullshit answers for $1,000 Alex
Renting is what buying is for corporations today.
By that token, if someone is punching you in the face repeatedly, don't defend yourself.
You aren’t stealing from the person you’re getting it from, you’re stealing from the person who created it
They can still have it too.
Not stealing, infringing on their copyright.
At least in my country, that’s only if you distribute
Not in the US. Unauthorized reproduction of a copyrighted work for any reason is copyright infringement.
The USA can suck my European Girlcock
Fair, but I just ignore the stupid nonenforceable laws.
Artists have rights over their work, and no amount of whataboutisms will change that.
HOLY SHIT DUDE GOOD POINT GUESS WE SHOULD DELETE THE WHOLE FUCKING COMMUNITY
What exact rights though? A right to sell pixels or a right to burn a painting after someone bought it?
Unfortunately they sign over most of those rights to their preferred publisher.
There are always indie platforms they can publish to though
By a similar token, wage theft isn't a big deal because it's not like you're owning the person.
I don’t make money off of the things I pirate.
No but you're stealing the labor of others who did make it.
They really aren't. The labor that went into it is already paid in full, even if what the labor created earns for another 20 years, that labor won't see another dime for it. Can't steal what isn't there
It can happen in artistic fields like acting and game dev.
Fun fact: In game dev, at least, your initial payment to make a game is typically an advance on the share of the profits you'll get. So terms like "$100k to start and then 10%" function more like "10% to a minimum of $100k" in the long term.
The boss pays me for my time, I'm never getting that time back so I've sold it and they own it, in fact, they even get to keep the work I produced during that time to go with it.
Low effort argument.
No, the people who made it got paid. Their labor was compensated by their employer.
Buddy, read the room. You’re not changing anyone’s minds by following me from other posts.
I see this a lot on Lemmy. Smaller communities. The human trolls are funnier and sadder.
The money I would pay to study some of them like a bug..
You mean with a magnifying glass and some sunlight? 🙊
Oooooh good idea. What’s your hypothesis, good person?
Oh no, not the poor greedy executives!? Noooooooooo
How's that corporate cock tasting these days?
Understanding basic concepts is not sucking corporate cock lmao
You can be honest about piracy man. It's ok.
Now I get your username. SCB = sucking corporate boner
It's actually shorthand for Smooth Cocoa Butter.
I'm with you here. My up vote won't help much, but you're spot on. This thread is so strange.
Not the place for soapboxing
"saying true things" is not "soapboxing."
I've probably pirated more total tb than half the people here, but have the intellectual honesty to own what you're doing.
You're good at intellectual property rights violations. You broke the law. And yet, you did not steal .
Sure, a court would charge you with different crimes, but the concept is the concept and a forum post is not court.
I prayed shit all the time when I couldn't afford it. When I got money, I eventually rebuilt a lot of those games for convenience's sake. Comics, not so much, but I have thousands upon thousands of them.
I did it because I couldn't afford it. If you take something that is being sold, without paying for it, how is that concept not stealing?
Bro you can't be helped
Your right taking a topic to a place that is not talking about that thing is.
This is a weird take to have.
I have 0 problem with piracy but this sub claiming is as a morally superior thing to do really bugs me.
Someone is selling something I want. I either can't, or don't want to, pay for it, so I just take it. What's the morality there?
Not sure why you need this spelled out. There are varying degrees of "wrong." They're still all on one side of the spectrum.
I support piracy the same way I support shoplifting of certain goods - it's a social subsidy for poor people because we as a society don't guarantee enough spending power.
Well that and the generally ethical piracy of archival/illegal distribution to overcome laws.
Access to content. Same as Steam.
I'm not exactly against piracy but I don't see it as morally good. If anything I see it in the same way Gabe Newell sees piracy. It's not a good or bad force but rather a sort of force of human nature that comes about when companies can't make a decent service. The only way to kill piracy is by making a user experience that is better than constantly searching for torrents. You need a decent platform that people are willing to pay for. Enshitification is basically a summoning circle for pirates. Sirusly covering your platform with scam ads is just gonna make demand for ad blockers. Not selling old games at all is just gonna make demand for emulators. Charging $50 dollars for a text book is just gonna make demand for a PDF scans. It's crap like that that makes me consider piracy good and a necessity today.
Don't really disagree with this at all. My only complaint is when the "It's totally moral and good and right" justifications come along
Fire is Hot
Not all Hot is Fire.
Yes, there are different types of theft.
Fire:piracy as Theft:heat in your analogy.
Well, since analogy seems to be your weak point:
not all piracy is theft
EZPZ.
Per your own analogy, that's not what you set up.
What you'd want to do is something like this
"All dogs bark, but not all dogs bark the same."
You want your generalized term (barking) to be the central point then narrow to your difference (different barks).
Yours set the broad precedent of heat/fire being hot (theft being wrong) but not all heat being fire. I understood your intent, but what you're literally saying here is that not all theft is piracy, which is true but irrelevant.
Wrong.
All fire is hot.
Not everything that's hot is fire.
You failed to understand the analogy yet again.
I made no statements about the morality of piracy, I was just pointing out the false equivalency in your statement about "similar tokens".
You equated wage theft with piracy somehow, and ownership with slavery I guess? I'm not even sure, your analogy was a mess.
So I broke it down for you and skipped the analogies in my reply, so as not to confuse the point you seem to be missing: Not all piracy is theft.
ez.
pz.
I don't misunderstand you. I even acknowledged your intended point in my breakdown.
I never said "not all theft is piracy".
I said "not all piracy is theft".
Or taking ownership of a rental car without permissions or any sort of exchange