3 ms·

The biggest issue with "piracy" overall is that it describes a phenomenon where users of an existing platform are sticking to the agreed upon way of using that

The biggest issue with "piracy" overall is that it describes a phenomenon where users of an existing platform are sticking to the agreed upon way of using that platform as designed despite corporate lawyers' best attempts at changing terms to try and invent a scarcity where there is none. They tried to invent jaywalking for the web, and it went... poorly. At least outside of corporate-lawyer-heavy circles.

matheusmoreira 5y ago
They're trying to use a system created in the 1700s in the 21st century. They're out of touch. Back then, if you wanted to copy a book, you'd have to do it by hand. You'd need to literally write the words into a new book. Copyright infringement at scale required industrial hardware like printing presses. Distribution required physically moving stuff around. It's the 21st century now. Computers exist and nearly everyone has one. Copying data is a fundamental operation. It's as easy as copy and paste. We can easily create millions of copies of any data in seconds, filling up entire hard drives if we want. We can transmit these copies over the network to any number of computers at negligible costs. These copyright people are so out of touch with reality it hurts. The level of tyranny required to stop this would give any free society pause.
- hypertele-Xii 5y ago
  It's an interesting topic. I agree with you but let's remember that paper-based information still exists. New books are being written and printed as we speak, and the cost is greater than neglible ($20/book single print). Computer-based information is a very new thing and could potentially vanish overnight to some unexpected space weather. Society hasn't transitioned completely from one to the other. As long as cash exists beside banks' computers, paper information exists and must be given the serious consideration it deserves. The printing press was invented some 600 years ago. Computers have existed for like 50. It's very much "in touch" to not dismiss print.
  - matheusmoreira 5y ago
    Paper exists in the physical world. It makes sense to apply old copyright laws to them. They're physical things, naturally scarce. My argument is that they make no sense in the virtual world. Once information makes its way there, it can be copied and distributed worldwide at negligible costs and with zero limitations. Pretending otherwise means living in denial of reality.
    - hypertele-Xii 5y ago
      Yea but it's not like all of our laws, institutions, and processes can just pivot instantly. There's organizational inertia to keep doing things the old way, regardless of whether it makes sense.
      - matheusmoreira 5y ago
        Then it's our responsibility to shock and disrupt them until they wake up to the new reality. The alternative is they're going to retrofit the old systems and apply them to computing and the internet, destroying their potential in the process. Enforcing copyright in the 21st century means ending computing freedom. They must make it so computers only run approved software. I would rather see copyright abolished.

matheusmoreira 5y ago

They're trying to use a system created in the 1700s in the 21st century. They're out of touch. Back then, if you wanted to copy a book, you'd have to do it by hand. You'd need to literally write the words into a new book. Copyright infringement at scale required industrial hardware like printing presses. Distribution required physically moving stuff around. It's the 21st century now. Computers exist and nearly everyone has one. Copying data is a fundamental operation. It's as easy as copy and paste. We can easily create millions of copies of any data in seconds, filling up entire hard drives if we want. We can transmit these copies over the network to any number of computers at negligible costs. These copyright people are so out of touch with reality it hurts. The level of tyranny required to stop this would give any free society pause.

hypertele-Xii 5y ago
It's an interesting topic. I agree with you but let's remember that paper-based information still exists. New books are being written and printed as we speak, and the cost is greater than neglible ($20/book single print). Computer-based information is a very new thing and could potentially vanish overnight to some unexpected space weather. Society hasn't transitioned completely from one to the other. As long as cash exists beside banks' computers, paper information exists and must be given the serious consideration it deserves. The printing press was invented some 600 years ago. Computers have existed for like 50. It's very much "in touch" to not dismiss print.
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  Paper exists in the physical world. It makes sense to apply old copyright laws to them. They're physical things, naturally scarce. My argument is that they make no sense in the virtual world. Once information makes its way there, it can be copied and distributed worldwide at negligible costs and with zero limitations. Pretending otherwise means living in denial of reality.
  - hypertele-Xii 5y ago
    Yea but it's not like all of our laws, institutions, and processes can just pivot instantly. There's organizational inertia to keep doing things the old way, regardless of whether it makes sense.
    - matheusmoreira 5y ago
      Then it's our responsibility to shock and disrupt them until they wake up to the new reality. The alternative is they're going to retrofit the old systems and apply them to computing and the internet, destroying their potential in the process. Enforcing copyright in the 21st century means ending computing freedom. They must make it so computers only run approved software. I would rather see copyright abolished.