3 ms·

I don’t think pirating software should be a crime. That’s my point. I’m consistent on my principle and you aren’t. I don’t decide to support IP when it would be

I don’t think pirating software should be a crime. That’s my point. I’m consistent on my principle and you aren’t. I don’t decide to support IP when it would benefit me, I’m against it always. Adobe can protect their sources by limiting source access and mandating NDAs for their employees. I’m not stealing anything from you by copying your art or pirating your software. You still have it. If me and you haven’t signed a contract, I don’t owe you shit. Simple as that.

voltaireodactyl 4y ago
You keep saying I pick-and-choose when to support IP. Nowhere have I said any such thing. Rather, I consistently support it — in the case of software, art, engineering, and medicine, etc. When an actual alternative financial model with a chance at becoming reality appears, I’ll be first in line. That I disagree with your position is not inconsistency on my part, it’s a reflection of us having different values. That’s okay. I’d still love to hear your alternative financial model, like I said. Unless you’re accusing me of being a secret artist? Even then, that assumes your position (“all artists, without exception, support the theft of software tools but do not support the theft of their own material”) is correct, which it is not. For starters, how are we defining artist? For example, do you imagine Mimes are pilfering Adobe on principle?
- alphanullmeric 4y ago
  You’re against pirating then?
  - voltaireodactyl 4y ago
    Philosophically? Not at all. Morally? Depends on the circumstances. Practically? Yes. I like art, and wish to keep seeing it produced at a high level of quality, and that requires community. So until the world agrees on an economy not premised on extraction of value from the individual, I oppose pirating. Pay people for their work. That being said, I know I don't speak only for myself when I say I would prefer to be paid for my work, but if the price will prevent someone from seeing it, I'd prefer the work be seen. Be careful not to confuse artists, who create things, with distributors, who do not. They are the ones you're really angry at.

voltaireodactyl 4y ago

You keep saying I pick-and-choose when to support IP. Nowhere have I said any such thing. Rather, I consistently support it — in the case of software, art, engineering, and medicine, etc. When an actual alternative financial model with a chance at becoming reality appears, I’ll be first in line. That I disagree with your position is not inconsistency on my part, it’s a reflection of us having different values. That’s okay. I’d still love to hear your alternative financial model, like I said. Unless you’re accusing me of being a secret artist? Even then, that assumes your position (“all artists, without exception, support the theft of software tools but do not support the theft of their own material”) is correct, which it is not. For starters, how are we defining artist? For example, do you imagine Mimes are pilfering Adobe on principle?

alphanullmeric 4y ago
You’re against pirating then?
- voltaireodactyl 4y ago
  Philosophically? Not at all. Morally? Depends on the circumstances. Practically? Yes. I like art, and wish to keep seeing it produced at a high level of quality, and that requires community. So until the world agrees on an economy not premised on extraction of value from the individual, I oppose pirating. Pay people for their work. That being said, I know I don't speak only for myself when I say I would prefer to be paid for my work, but if the price will prevent someone from seeing it, I'd prefer the work be seen. Be careful not to confuse artists, who create things, with distributors, who do not. They are the ones you're really angry at.