4 ms·

This creates inefficiencies and it just isn't fair to those who just want to sell their creations without holding a concert or drumming up some other scheme to

• rayiner 7y ago
  That’s a specious argument. People are willing to pay large amounts of money for content. That has nothing to do with the propriety if people taking that content for free, other than it proves that those people are getting a valuable thing for nothing.
  • kody 7y ago
    If the tried and true method of getting paid is through concerts, Patreon, crowdfunding new albums, or selling CDs in the street, I don't think the market is as "unfair" as xhkkffbf is arguing. I agree that this has nothing to do with the propriety of people taking content with a price tag for free. But I think muddling the market sense of fairness (I don't want to/cannot perform in a concert; people should pay me for selling MP3s online) and the ethics of copying data is dangerous. Especially when we are solving the problem through legislation.
    • tptacek 7y ago
      There's nothing tried and true about that method. Artists do it because they have to, and the overwhelming majority of them are unable to make a full-time career out of it, and either relegate art to a side-hustle or take full-time jobs adjacent to their art (like recording engineering or record production).
• wolfgke 7y ago
  > Are you arguing that it's unfair that a business needs to sell something that people are willing to pay for I argue against that media companies are using goon squads (police, judges, industrial-prison complex) to rob people who pirate their money or their freedom. The fact that pircay exists exactly does show that their exist people that do not want to pay.
  • pitaj 7y ago
    > The fact that pircay exists exactly does show that their exist people that do not want to pay. Many people use piracy to get art they literally cannot buy legally. Many others use it to get digital versions of physical media they bought.
    • moron4hire 7y ago
      I also know a lot of rich people who pirate the shit out of anything they can find.
  • zanny 7y ago
    > does show that their exist people that do not want to pay. Of course not? This entire thread is talking about how IP is a sham. Its totally out of touch with physical reality. The original design of IP to begin with was more to protect the printers than the artists themselves - the problem that needed addressing in the 17th-18th century during the dawn of IP protection wasn't that creativity was this new thing people were trying out - it was that industrial printing of media was suddenly a thing at a scale whereby the manufacturers of books wanted their infrastructure protected from scalpers undercutting their expensive runs of literature. IP was conceived as a romantic way to protect the middle men of creativity from the start, and while those middle men still exist, their function has been totally technologically obsoleted to the point where random strangers I have never and will never meet are offering to send me copies of things I want for free. That is damn magic that could not have happened even thirty years ago. There was always a marginal cost to information transfer that is now gone, and with its departure the hollow justifications for information monopolies at gunpoint are plain to see as immoral and unreasonable. They always were, it was always a protection racket for middle men, but at least last century the economic indicators aligned marginally with the concept. Now they are in total opposition to physical reality and those that realize it are less guilt tripped by pirating some corporation larger than several nations works.