3 ms·
Ok, point taken. Not "stealing", but still not paying the price of access. Making a movie or tv show etc. isn't free of cost, and if you want to watch it then i
by f4c39012 3y ago
Ok, point taken. Not "stealing", but still not paying the price of access. Making a movie or tv show etc. isn't free of cost, and if you want to watch it then it has a value
- rpgbr 3y agoSo anti-piracy people should change their message. Calling people that pirate stuff thieves is rude; most of them opt for piracy because can't pay, doesn't care too much to pay or is averse of industry praxis such this Sony's clusterfuck.
- f4c39012 3y agoI guess "stealing" is done by "thieves" but i didn't mean to be so harsh, next time i'll be more careful with my words. Whilst copying bits has negligible cost, the _original_ cost of production has to be borne by someone, do the people paying to watch pay more to cover those that don't pay? The price of access is part of the license, another example would being crediting sources when using cc by-sa material. Sony's actions here don't engender any sympathy, but with piracy i'm more concerned with the writers and artists etc.. What I _meant_ to emphasise was that the button shouldn't be labelled "buy" if someone else can take it away. Not allowing this label this would help steer people away from situations like Sony just created, and help encourage DRM-free options.