7 ms·
Monopolies and price-gouging are a violation of the social contract.
by j_maffe 3y ago
Monopolies and price-gouging are a violation of the social contract.
- WendyTheWillow 3y agoFirstly they are not (and presupposing the latter claim begs the question anyway), and secondly if you think that then don’t participate in the use of the ill gotten goods. Nobody died because they couldn’t hear a song or watch a movie.
- monkeywork 3y agoBy your logic who died when someone downloaded a non approved copy?
- WendyTheWillow 3y agoThat isn’t my logic, but the artist is harmed, for one…
- majkinetor 3y agoArtists are not harmed, for sure. If you don't have money, you wouldn't buy it anyway. By pirating in that scenario, you are promoting it, and thus artist benefits.
- WendyTheWillow 3y agoYou’re presuming all pirates only pirate what they otherwise would not purchase, which is impossible to claim credibly.
- virtual_void 3y agoAnd you are presuming that no pirates do by claiming that all piracy is immoral. How do you stand on the idea that someone desperately poor, who cannot afford a text book that would be transformative to their life, pirates said book. Is that still immoral?
- WendyTheWillow 3y agoNot at all, I’m claiming piracy generally is immoral. I’m sure you can find exceptions, but the general case is the problem.
- virtual_void 3y agoWithout a clear definition of morality that is considered universal you cannot make any claims about generality. There are many examples of piracy where no one loses out yet someone does benefit. Painting such a complex subject with such a broad brush makes it seem like we’re just talking about your particular feelings rather than something universal. Which is fine, but you’re making claims of generality without presenting a cogent argument.
- WendyTheWillow 3y agoSorry but no, this is not a vague concept that we do not share; morality is indeed agreed upon in large strokes, by the very virtue of us interacting in this forum, we already are implicitly agreeing to a number of shared values. For one, you’re not calling me insulting names, you’re accepting I have a point of view, etc. What I am claiming presumes only that you live in a modern society, and therefore you participate in the social contract. Given that, what I am saying is then a conclusion of that.
- virtual_void 3y agoYou’re claiming that all piracy is immoral or breaches a social contract. Then you claim exceptions are ok. Thus not all piracy is immoral. I am trying to get to specifics but you keep waving your hands about this stuff.
- WendyTheWillow 3y agoGood thing i didn’t claim that all piracy is immoral then! And I’ve given lots of specifics. It’s just not a complex concept.
- alpaca128 3y agoArtists aren't the ones getting millions in salary bonuses each year.
- gchamonlive 3y agoThat is a fallacy. The artists tend to gain with it, for one piracy boosts concert sales (https://torrentfreak.com/piracy-boosts-concert-ticket-sales-hurts-box-office-revenue-180731/ https://torrentfreak.com/piracy-boosts-concert-ticket-sales-...). Box office revenues are hurt but the last Hollywood strikes just showed us the corporations couldn't care less about the artists. Only business models that rely on monopolies are harmed.
- WendyTheWillow 3y agoIt wouldn’t be a fallacy, it’d just be wrong, except it’s not wrong, and very basic concept that you can’t eat public goodwill demonstrates why. And the entire concept of property is built on monopoly. Are you saying you don’t believe in property?
- Juliate 3y agoAre you saying that there's no difference in nature between physical and immaterial? Or that intellectual property and physical property are the same, with the same working principles, and follow the same rules?
- WendyTheWillow 3y agoNope!
- johnnyanmac 3y agoThere in fact are. And I think it's silly how people always resort to physical metaphors whenever the digital realities inconvenience them. And vice versa. Ditigal media isn't physical, and in this case the physical media was on a closed ecosystem and attached to a server to stream or at least check in to verify. You wouldn't need all this with a plain ol' DVD, but you got advantadeges in that that movie played on any PS device you logged into. If you want DRM free digital media, don't buy the above.
- gchamonlive 3y agoWhat are you talking about? A fallacy is a "mistaken belief", so of course it is wrong. And you should look more into the concept of free riding. For that a good introduction would be The philosophers arms episode about free riding. And what is that about private property? Where did that come from? We are talking about different concepts here, it is about markets and business models. As long as we don't honestly debate how outdated our modes of consumption are, piracy would be a natural response to artificial scarcity.
- leptons 3y ago>and secondly if you think that then don’t participate in the use of the ill gotten goods If a company has a monopoly on something, you cannot just go somewhere else to get something equivalent - that's the thing about monopolies, in a lot of cases, you simply don't have a choice.
- WendyTheWillow 3y agoYou do have a choice; do not consume the product. You are not entitled to art because you want it.
- zelphirkalt 3y agoThis idea creates a lot of chance inequality in society and excludes many people from good parts of life.
- WendyTheWillow 3y agoYes, inequality in society will exist, but such is the nature of the concept of property. Not everyone gets to access all property.
- leptons 3y agoThis isn't about "art". That's a disingenuous argument. What if the monopoly is keeping a live-saving medicine prohibitively expensive, because people are just greedy. Or some other thing that modern lives are based around - not "art". In some cases the choice is buy the thing from the monopoly, or die, or be jobless or some other kind of calamity. We're not talking about hanging art on a wall to look at.
- johnnyanmac 3y agoIt is literally about art. People need to stop exaggerating piracy to life essentials if they want to be taken seriously. No, I will not blame a homeless dude who grabs a few pieces of food from a grocery store. It can be literal life or death. I can't say the same about someone who "needs to play GTA V" (it was already free at some points. So you're not just entitled but inefficient in your frugality). we can take down big pharma first and then worry about DRM on media you want to consume. It's not all or nothing.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- j_maffe 3y agoHow can a student not participate in the use of the ill-gotten goods of textbooks for their studies? For a researcher in a developing country for research papers? Nobody dies, but a lot of people fall behind. It doesn't beg the question when it's so obvious which industries have abused copyright law, gained over 100% in profits, and manipulated the market to gain absolute control over what is offered. Of course, pirating an indie band's song is a lot more in the questionable area (and not done nearly as often, since piracy by nature focuses on the more necessary/popular products) but that's not what's under discussion.
- WendyTheWillow 3y agoYes, the piracy is an indie song is precisely what’s under discussion.
- j_maffe 3y agoPiracy is so much more than that. If that is your concern you should specify it. Even then the morality is still debatable but in my view discussion of it is a distraction from the bigger issues.
- WendyTheWillow 3y agoAnd in my view, the casual nature of piracy enabling the breakdown of the social contract is one of the many things tearing society apart, so to me it’s pretty important.
- justinclift 3y ago> to me it’s pretty important. What other things do you feel are "tearing society apart", and how important are they to you compared to this?
- atq2119 3y agoSocieties are usual torn apart from the top, because that's where there are people with power to make impactful decisions.