5 ms·

This has been the argument for software piracy for the longest time and it's a convincing one: a student can't afford Adobe Photoshop but if they use a pirated

by chx 7y ago

This has been the argument for software piracy for the longest time and it's a convincing one: a student can't afford Adobe Photoshop but if they use a pirated copy once they are at a company they will want to use it. Or, in less charitable terms, you can't get blood from a stone, so why bother. This argument is so untrue for books it's not even funny. There is a huge treasure trove of free ebooks available and very often you can get a used mass paperback for less than a dollar. And there's no win from a pirated copy.

TeMPOraL 7y ago
Books, like movies, videogames and often software tools, aren't substitutable. If I like Photoshop, or want to use it because it's popular, I'm unlikely to accept GIMP as a free alternative. If I want to read or watch The Expanse, I'm 100% not going to read some random free e-book or dollar paperback, because that's a different book. You can't substitute Shrek for Star Wars, nor Slime Rancher for Call of Duty. Commodities don't get pirated. Commodities get market competition.
- chx 7y ago
  So you decided on not just merely passing the time with reading but reading a specific book and because you can't afford to pay for it, now you think you are entitled to it for free because why? If I want to buy a Vuis Luitton suitcase but can only afford American Tourister then I can just help myself to it? How is that right?
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    > If I want to buy a Vuis Luitton suitcase but can only afford American Tourister then I can just help myself to it? How is that right? If you could 3D-print yourself a copy that looks just like the original, then sure, I'd say it's absolutely right to do. But that's my opinion, I'm not a fan of the concept of intellectual property. Regardless, what you did here is trying to equate piracy with theft, which is incorrect. Copying does not make the original disappear. Copyright infringement may be a crime, but it's a different crime than theft, both legally and morally. > but reading a specific book and because you can't afford to pay for it, now you think you are entitled to it for free because why? Well, if I can't afford it, I'm not going to buy it anyway. The publisher loses nothing over me making a copy. And there's an argument to be made that popular works of art are essential, because they form a shared cultural background; not having access to them means being excluded from the discussions your society is having.
bigyikes 7y ago
There have been many occasions in my life where I've pirated some Adobe product. I was about to do so again a few months ago and was worried about downloading malware until I had the realization: "Wait, I have a job now. I can just buy the software!" It felt good to give Adobe my money, and I am not certain I would have paid for the product today had I not donned my peg-leg and eyepatch growing up.
tzs 7y ago
Another factor usually ignored is the effect on substitutes. That student who can't afford several hundred dollars for Photoshop? Maybe everything they actually need to do can be done with Pixelmator and they could afford the $30 for that. But they pirate Photoshop instead.
- throwaway3neu94 7y ago
  Or maybe GIMP can do everything they need so nobody needs to get paid. But if nobody gets paid anyway, might as well copy photoshop instead. Legal issues aside, it doesn't seem that irrational. I think in practice, the moral argument just doesn't work too well for intellectual property, and creators need to deal with it. Which, unsurprisingly, they do, in different ways (be it through making payment convenient like Netflix, prosecuting individuals like MPAA, or focusing on enterprise deals like Adobe, ... or still pushing the moral angle because a statistical effect is better than none).

by chx 7y ago

TeMPOraL 7y ago

Books, like movies, videogames and often software tools, aren't substitutable. If I like Photoshop, or want to use it because it's popular, I'm unlikely to accept GIMP as a free alternative. If I want to read or watch The Expanse, I'm 100% not going to read some random free e-book or dollar paperback, because that's a different book. You can't substitute Shrek for Star Wars, nor Slime Rancher for Call of Duty. Commodities don't get pirated. Commodities get market competition.

chx 7y ago
So you decided on not just merely passing the time with reading but reading a specific book and because you can't afford to pay for it, now you think you are entitled to it for free because why? If I want to buy a Vuis Luitton suitcase but can only afford American Tourister then I can just help myself to it? How is that right?
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  > If I want to buy a Vuis Luitton suitcase but can only afford American Tourister then I can just help myself to it? How is that right? If you could 3D-print yourself a copy that looks just like the original, then sure, I'd say it's absolutely right to do. But that's my opinion, I'm not a fan of the concept of intellectual property. Regardless, what you did here is trying to equate piracy with theft, which is incorrect. Copying does not make the original disappear. Copyright infringement may be a crime, but it's a different crime than theft, both legally and morally. > but reading a specific book and because you can't afford to pay for it, now you think you are entitled to it for free because why? Well, if I can't afford it, I'm not going to buy it anyway. The publisher loses nothing over me making a copy. And there's an argument to be made that popular works of art are essential, because they form a shared cultural background; not having access to them means being excluded from the discussions your society is having.

bigyikes 7y ago

There have been many occasions in my life where I've pirated some Adobe product. I was about to do so again a few months ago and was worried about downloading malware until I had the realization: "Wait, I have a job now. I can just buy the software!" It felt good to give Adobe my money, and I am not certain I would have paid for the product today had I not donned my peg-leg and eyepatch growing up.

tzs 7y ago

Another factor usually ignored is the effect on substitutes. That student who can't afford several hundred dollars for Photoshop? Maybe everything they actually need to do can be done with Pixelmator and they could afford the $30 for that. But they pirate Photoshop instead.

throwaway3neu94 7y ago
Or maybe GIMP can do everything they need so nobody needs to get paid. But if nobody gets paid anyway, might as well copy photoshop instead. Legal issues aside, it doesn't seem that irrational. I think in practice, the moral argument just doesn't work too well for intellectual property, and creators need to deal with it. Which, unsurprisingly, they do, in different ways (be it through making payment convenient like Netflix, prosecuting individuals like MPAA, or focusing on enterprise deals like Adobe, ... or still pushing the moral angle because a statistical effect is better than none).