4 ms·
Really have to love how the HN hivemind can simultaneously defend wholesale intellectual property theft (genlib, piratebay, et al) and claim that copyright law
by dallashoxton 8y ago
Really have to love how the HN hivemind can simultaneously defend wholesale intellectual property theft (genlib, piratebay, et al) and claim that copyright law is too strict while getting morally bent out of shape over someone aggregating and curating otherwise low-value instagram posts in order to eat takeout for free.
The lack of moral consistency is astounding.
- th0ma5 8y agoNo, digital information is not the same as a tangible object, so everything, including the morals, is different.
- dallashoxton 8y agoMany people are taking issue with him quote-unquote "stealing" other people's content when he's ostensibly just resharing single images that fit in a broader theme of being vaguely NYC-related. This seems much more defensible as fair use as opposed to rehosting/pirating somebody's entire textbook or TV show.
- detaro 8y agoIt's almost as if the "hivemind" isn't a hivemind, but a large set of people with different opinions/morals and different willingness to express it in different contexts.
- scott_s 8y agoI am an individual and not a hivemind. I, personally, find piratebay unethical. I pay for what I consume. Paywalled scientific articles are a different beast, which I don't want to get into here.
- tasuki 8y ago> The lack of moral consistency is astounding. Is it? Did you expect all HN users to have exactly the same moral compass?
- canes123456 8y agoPeople can believe that copyright law is too strict while also believing that copying other people work is not moral. Adultery should not be illegal but also should be look at as morally wrong. Also, the actual harm from downloading one additional episode of game of thrones is nearly non existent. The harm of stealing the photos from individual photographers is surely greater.
- int_19h 8y agoMany people believe that it's unethical to use other people's work for profit, at least not without sharing back, which seems to be the case here. It's not inconsistent to believe that, while also believing that non-commercial copyright infringement is not immoral.