3 ms·

The position that "theft is free, so anything not given away fails to compete" is not a realistic position to argue with.

HWR_14 5y ago
I don't know if that will be unrealistic in the future. Once AI is making the content you consume, the price seems like it would rapidly approach zero.
jazzyjackson 5y ago
Too bad theft is an option then, because the paid services must compete with it. There are more dimensions than price. (Also infringement isn't theft but if you haven't been convinced by now...)
matheusmoreira 5y ago
Theft is not free, copying data is. They're the ones making everything worse for everybody because they can't deal with that reality. These streaming services can't even manage to produce a video player with decent controls, we had better software in the 90s. Also, copyright infringement is not theft. It's copyright infringement and it's only a problem if you accept the notion that copyright is a legitimate system to begin with.
pjc50 5y ago
It's the only realistic position. Heck, it's the only reason streaming services can exist; without piracy pressure everything would be pay per view or pay per stream at far higher rates.
coldtea 5y ago
Copyright extension is theft by lobbies pressuring the legislative body against the spirit (and original letter) of the law. In this sense, thousands of movies and albums (stuff recorded before 1970) would be public domain now based on the 1901 copyright terms... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  Yeah. They reap all these benefits. When it's OUR turn to exercise our public domain rights, they change the rules of the game. They move the goalposts. Why respect their rights when they don't respect ours? There is absolutely no reason to recognize their "property" as legitimate.
prepend 5y ago
When theft has a better user experience that’s important. Important because it’s more user oriented than the plethora of poorly designed apps with dark patterns to piss me off but keep me subscribed. It’s important because it’s the reality. Today, my janky RSS feed setup dumping stuff to a network folder is better for discovering new shows and movies. I’m more likely to see new content released through my tracker, browsing in 10 seconds than spending minutes scrolling through Netflix, and Hulu, and Prime. Just to see if there’s something new. These services make it hard to use. I’d pay extra if Netflix just gave me an RSS feed and let me filter it. The fact that pirates are able to do this, volunteering is only part of it.

HWR_14 5y ago

I don't know if that will be unrealistic in the future. Once AI is making the content you consume, the price seems like it would rapidly approach zero.

jazzyjackson 5y ago

Too bad theft is an option then, because the paid services must compete with it. There are more dimensions than price. (Also infringement isn't theft but if you haven't been convinced by now...)

matheusmoreira 5y ago

Theft is not free, copying data is. They're the ones making everything worse for everybody because they can't deal with that reality. These streaming services can't even manage to produce a video player with decent controls, we had better software in the 90s. Also, copyright infringement is not theft. It's copyright infringement and it's only a problem if you accept the notion that copyright is a legitimate system to begin with.

pjc50 5y ago

It's the only realistic position. Heck, it's the only reason streaming services can exist; without piracy pressure everything would be pay per view or pay per stream at far higher rates.

coldtea 5y ago

Copyright extension is theft by lobbies pressuring the legislative body against the spirit (and original letter) of the law. In this sense, thousands of movies and albums (stuff recorded before 1970) would be public domain now based on the 1901 copyright terms... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act

matheusmoreira 5y ago
Yeah. They reap all these benefits. When it's OUR turn to exercise our public domain rights, they change the rules of the game. They move the goalposts. Why respect their rights when they don't respect ours? There is absolutely no reason to recognize their "property" as legitimate.

prepend 5y ago

When theft has a better user experience that’s important. Important because it’s more user oriented than the plethora of poorly designed apps with dark patterns to piss me off but keep me subscribed. It’s important because it’s the reality. Today, my janky RSS feed setup dumping stuff to a network folder is better for discovering new shows and movies. I’m more likely to see new content released through my tracker, browsing in 10 seconds than spending minutes scrolling through Netflix, and Hulu, and Prime. Just to see if there’s something new. These services make it hard to use. I’d pay extra if Netflix just gave me an RSS feed and let me filter it. The fact that pirates are able to do this, volunteering is only part of it.