4 ms·

Piracy is a moral imperative. The internet was supposed to be free and break down barriers. Instead what we have now is a show available in the UK but not avail

Piracy is a moral imperative. The internet was supposed to be free and break down barriers. Instead what we have now is a show available in the UK but not available in the US. This is not acceptable. This plus the fact that actual artists get a pittance, means the flag will fly high till companies learn. Also piracy has become much more reliable these days. There are systems which will make sure you get 4k streams based on any genre you enjoy. New shows from around the world. No need to wait for Netflix to add it to your countries playlist that to hidden behind garbage UX. At the end of the day it is about availability, user control, artist benefits and showing the middle finger to large corporations. That is the hacker mindset. That is what I grew up with in the early 2000s and it is substantially better than what we are "supposed" to do now. Hope that makes sense.

MattPalmer1086 3y ago
No, it absolutely isn't a moral imperative, quite the reverse. I don't know where you get the idea that the internet was "supposed" to be "free" or why the fact that a global transport network for information exists implies that everything transported over it should not require any payment. The logical endpoint of your position is that you will get what you pay for: content that costs almost nothing to produce.
- ESTheComposer 3y ago
  The irony here is from their post history they are a business owner that made 4m in profits last year. Guess it’s a moral imperative to steal from them eh?
- MrStonedOne 3y ago
  you picked up the wrong definition of "free". They meant free as in freedom.
- slimrec77 3y ago
  The internet being free was a 90s cyberpunk ideal. Those ideas were not very well thought out to say the least.
- drewzero1 3y ago
  Note the first paragraph - it's not payment (or lack thereof) that is being called into question. It's a matter of availability. Despite the streaming companies' worldwide reach they can't (or won't bother to) get the rights to stream content to different countries.
  - MattPalmer1086 3y ago
    You are right, I misread the point being made. I still think piracy is the wrong thing to do, and definitely not a moral imperative. I do agree that restricted availability is one of the key drivers though. I did once pirate a second series of a TV show when it was not possible to stream it in my country (after I exhausted every possible way to pay for it). These days I just wait to buy DVDs and stick them on Plex. Takes a bit longer but it's not that urgent, and I'm not dependent on a streaming service to access it.
tacticalturtle 3y ago
I don’t understand how it follows that if artists are paid a pittance, then the moral thing to do is to still consume their content - while depriving them of revenue from residuals.
- giantrobot 3y ago
  They get the same amount of residuals if someone doesn't watch something or if they pirate it. Is it immoral to not watch something that gives someone residuals? Do you owe them residuals just because they made something?
  - ESTheComposer 3y ago
    You are using the age old argument of “I wouldn’t have bought it anyway, so they won’t get anything from me either way” This is just a roundabout way of excusing stealing. If the creator of something says “if you want to view my work, you must pay me a dollar”, then yes it is stealing (immoral) if you view it without paying. The context around it as to whether you would’ve watched it anyway is irrelevant. Apply the same logic to literally any other item and your argument falls apart (I wouldn’t have bought that chocolate bar anyway so they’re not really losing money from me)
    - al_borland 3y ago
      I would be curious to know what percentage of pirated movies are actually watched. I think a lot of people download things because they are available and might look interesting, but then never watch it. Does the steeling happen when the content is acquired or consumed? If someone isn’t going to watch it, even when it was free, did they steal anything? With a chocolate bar there is a physical good that could have been sold to someone else, but instead a new one needs to be produced to sell to someone else. This isn’t the case with digital files.
      - ESTheComposer 3y ago
        It doesn't matter how many times you can sell the same item. If someone spent time and money producing something, no matter how small, and they dictate they want $x for you to own/consume it, then you are stealing if you don't give them $x for it. In terms of "when" it's stolen re downloading vs watching, I would say when you download it personally as you now have access to the content without paying.
spacebacon 3y ago
My 12 year old self would agree with you. But I was still opening and closing my friends CD ROM drives at 12 also exposing their home computers to anyone who knew what port to scan. Yeah it was fun but I didn’t fully grasp the consequences at the time. The consequences of piracy are severe to the pirate and to the artist. The true spirit of a hacker is indeed an artist … Someone who questions societal norms in expression of their skills that paints their insight or dissonance for the rest of us to enjoy. In this case your moral imperative is cognitive dissonance. If you find a way to pirate and directly support the artist (cutting out the corporations you hate) that would be more of a moral imperative but also ignoring the importance of the suits that support the artist financially, legally, and pragmatically.

MattPalmer1086 3y ago

No, it absolutely isn't a moral imperative, quite the reverse. I don't know where you get the idea that the internet was "supposed" to be "free" or why the fact that a global transport network for information exists implies that everything transported over it should not require any payment. The logical endpoint of your position is that you will get what you pay for: content that costs almost nothing to produce.

ESTheComposer 3y ago
The irony here is from their post history they are a business owner that made 4m in profits last year. Guess it’s a moral imperative to steal from them eh?
MrStonedOne 3y ago
you picked up the wrong definition of "free". They meant free as in freedom.
slimrec77 3y ago
The internet being free was a 90s cyberpunk ideal. Those ideas were not very well thought out to say the least.
drewzero1 3y ago
Note the first paragraph - it's not payment (or lack thereof) that is being called into question. It's a matter of availability. Despite the streaming companies' worldwide reach they can't (or won't bother to) get the rights to stream content to different countries.
- MattPalmer1086 3y ago
  You are right, I misread the point being made. I still think piracy is the wrong thing to do, and definitely not a moral imperative. I do agree that restricted availability is one of the key drivers though. I did once pirate a second series of a TV show when it was not possible to stream it in my country (after I exhausted every possible way to pay for it). These days I just wait to buy DVDs and stick them on Plex. Takes a bit longer but it's not that urgent, and I'm not dependent on a streaming service to access it.

tacticalturtle 3y ago

I don’t understand how it follows that if artists are paid a pittance, then the moral thing to do is to still consume their content - while depriving them of revenue from residuals.

giantrobot 3y ago
They get the same amount of residuals if someone doesn't watch something or if they pirate it. Is it immoral to not watch something that gives someone residuals? Do you owe them residuals just because they made something?
- ESTheComposer 3y ago
  You are using the age old argument of “I wouldn’t have bought it anyway, so they won’t get anything from me either way” This is just a roundabout way of excusing stealing. If the creator of something says “if you want to view my work, you must pay me a dollar”, then yes it is stealing (immoral) if you view it without paying. The context around it as to whether you would’ve watched it anyway is irrelevant. Apply the same logic to literally any other item and your argument falls apart (I wouldn’t have bought that chocolate bar anyway so they’re not really losing money from me)
  - al_borland 3y ago
    I would be curious to know what percentage of pirated movies are actually watched. I think a lot of people download things because they are available and might look interesting, but then never watch it. Does the steeling happen when the content is acquired or consumed? If someone isn’t going to watch it, even when it was free, did they steal anything? With a chocolate bar there is a physical good that could have been sold to someone else, but instead a new one needs to be produced to sell to someone else. This isn’t the case with digital files.
    - ESTheComposer 3y ago
      It doesn't matter how many times you can sell the same item. If someone spent time and money producing something, no matter how small, and they dictate they want $x for you to own/consume it, then you are stealing if you don't give them $x for it. In terms of "when" it's stolen re downloading vs watching, I would say when you download it personally as you now have access to the content without paying.

spacebacon 3y ago

My 12 year old self would agree with you. But I was still opening and closing my friends CD ROM drives at 12 also exposing their home computers to anyone who knew what port to scan. Yeah it was fun but I didn’t fully grasp the consequences at the time. The consequences of piracy are severe to the pirate and to the artist. The true spirit of a hacker is indeed an artist … Someone who questions societal norms in expression of their skills that paints their insight or dissonance for the rest of us to enjoy. In this case your moral imperative is cognitive dissonance. If you find a way to pirate and directly support the artist (cutting out the corporations you hate) that would be more of a moral imperative but also ignoring the importance of the suits that support the artist financially, legally, and pragmatically.