3 ms·

Copying/sharing media is not the same as stealing from a store. We already had this debate like 30 years ago - "You wouldn't download a car!" Unless you really

Copying/sharing media is not the same as stealing from a store. We already had this debate like 30 years ago - "You wouldn't download a car!" Unless you really believe that borrowing a book from a friend deprives the author of a sale and that that's equivalent to pickpocketing $10 from the author. Google has every right to restrict who gets to access their services (although antitrust concerns do come up) and every user has the right to control the software on their devices.

Jensson 3y ago
> Copying/sharing media is not the same as stealing from a store This is different, you aren't copying youtube videos and sending them to a friend using your own resources, you are using their server capacity to watch it yourself. So you are costing Youtube money just like stealing from a store costs the store money. So the old "copying is not theft" argument doesn't hold here. It does work for torrenting etc, but not when you stream directly from their servers.
- ohhnoodont 3y ago
  Sure but the post I was responding to starts with "Would you use the same justification for pirating movies? Or for stealing from large supermarkets?", that's what I was responding to. Also in this context the situation is amusing to me given that YouTube's early success was built on pirated content. That continued for a long time even after Google's acquisition. With respect to server/network resources, like I said Google is free to restrict access as they see fit.
  - Jensson 3y ago
    > the post I was responding to starts with "Would you use the same justification for pirating movies? Or for stealing from large supermarkets?", that's what I was responding to The post you responded to didn't say that those two were the same, it clearly shows those two as different levels of bad if you read the next line: > "Not a pointed question, I just find it genuinely interesting where people draw the line." So your point here is just you not understanding and reacting with a meme since his post sounded a bit similar to an argument you have seen before.

Jensson 3y ago

> Copying/sharing media is not the same as stealing from a store This is different, you aren't copying youtube videos and sending them to a friend using your own resources, you are using their server capacity to watch it yourself. So you are costing Youtube money just like stealing from a store costs the store money. So the old "copying is not theft" argument doesn't hold here. It does work for torrenting etc, but not when you stream directly from their servers.

ohhnoodont 3y ago
Sure but the post I was responding to starts with "Would you use the same justification for pirating movies? Or for stealing from large supermarkets?", that's what I was responding to. Also in this context the situation is amusing to me given that YouTube's early success was built on pirated content. That continued for a long time even after Google's acquisition. With respect to server/network resources, like I said Google is free to restrict access as they see fit.
- Jensson 3y ago
  > the post I was responding to starts with "Would you use the same justification for pirating movies? Or for stealing from large supermarkets?", that's what I was responding to The post you responded to didn't say that those two were the same, it clearly shows those two as different levels of bad if you read the next line: > "Not a pointed question, I just find it genuinely interesting where people draw the line." So your point here is just you not understanding and reacting with a meme since his post sounded a bit similar to an argument you have seen before.