3 ms·

Piracy (stealing) _has_ to cause loss of revenue. It’s right in the definition. There’s no way around it. There’s also a moral component to all this. Regardle

Piracy (stealing) _has_ to cause loss of revenue. It’s right in the definition. There’s no way around it. There’s also a moral component to all this. Regardless of the calculus, if a creator says they don’t want to give their product away for free, that they’d like to be paid for every copy, we should respect that.

realusername 4y ago
> Piracy (stealing) _has_ to cause loss of revenue. It’s right in the definition. There’s no way around it. No that's not, that's an urban legend, feel free to point me to some aggregated research studies proving this, the copyright lobbies never managed to prove that during multiple decades. Repeating something over and over again on TV by paid lobbyist doesn't make it true, you have to prove it. > Regardless of the calculus, if a creator says they don’t want to give their product away for free, that they’d like to be paid for every copy, we should respect that. That's debatable at best.
- berniedurfee 4y ago
  If I produce a song and sell 1,000 copies for $1 each, but 1,000 copies are stolen by people who don’t pay me $1 for their copy, I get $1,000 instead of $2,000. That’s just how the math works out. Same as any other form of theft.
  - realusername 4y ago
    To start with, most of the copyright holders are actually dead since copyright right now is very long. That's going to be hard to state that you are preventing new Beatles songs by pirating the Beatles, they are not going to produce any new songs, regardless of what you do. Then in economics, free is different from any other price (even 1 cent), they have different behaviour and cannot be used interchangeably as demonstrated again and again during research. So no, your example is wrong, those people wouldn't have bought the song anyway and the total revenue from those people would be zero.
  - account42 4y ago
    Your entire premise that copyright infringement is theft is wrong. That is not the case, neither morally nor legally. As a result, your argumentation is flawed. The 1000 "pirated" copies were never copies that you had. Even in a world where you could magically prevent all sharing of information you would not have that many more copies sold.
account42 4y ago
> Piracy (stealing) Mislabeling (lying) is not a good way to start an argument.

realusername 4y ago

> Piracy (stealing) _has_ to cause loss of revenue. It’s right in the definition. There’s no way around it. No that's not, that's an urban legend, feel free to point me to some aggregated research studies proving this, the copyright lobbies never managed to prove that during multiple decades. Repeating something over and over again on TV by paid lobbyist doesn't make it true, you have to prove it. > Regardless of the calculus, if a creator says they don’t want to give their product away for free, that they’d like to be paid for every copy, we should respect that. That's debatable at best.

berniedurfee 4y ago
If I produce a song and sell 1,000 copies for $1 each, but 1,000 copies are stolen by people who don’t pay me $1 for their copy, I get $1,000 instead of $2,000. That’s just how the math works out. Same as any other form of theft.
- realusername 4y ago
  To start with, most of the copyright holders are actually dead since copyright right now is very long. That's going to be hard to state that you are preventing new Beatles songs by pirating the Beatles, they are not going to produce any new songs, regardless of what you do. Then in economics, free is different from any other price (even 1 cent), they have different behaviour and cannot be used interchangeably as demonstrated again and again during research. So no, your example is wrong, those people wouldn't have bought the song anyway and the total revenue from those people would be zero.
- account42 4y ago
  Your entire premise that copyright infringement is theft is wrong. That is not the case, neither morally nor legally. As a result, your argumentation is flawed. The 1000 "pirated" copies were never copies that you had. Even in a world where you could magically prevent all sharing of information you would not have that many more copies sold.

account42 4y ago

> Piracy (stealing) Mislabeling (lying) is not a good way to start an argument.