5 ms·
It is different though because theft removes the original item, while piracy is sharing a copy of it.
by NegativeLatency 3y ago
It is different though because theft removes the original item, while piracy is sharing a copy of it.
- johnny99k 3y agoPiracy is not stealing, it's counterfeiting. If you steal a car, the car company might lose money, but can make up the losses. With counterfeiting, it devalues the original, which has the possibility of destroying the entire product/business.
- Marsymars 3y agoI don’t think a definition of counterfeiting that includes unlicensed stock photography is an especially salient one.
- jobs_throwaway 3y ago> With counterfeiting, it devalues the original, which has the possibility of destroying the entire product/business. The evidence says that piracy actually increases the value of the original as pirates spend more money on the media than they would without the piracy option
- randomdata 3y agoIt is neither stealing or counterfeiting, it is copyright infringement.
- HPsquared 3y agoOn the other, other hand, TV streaming is a luxury good. It's not really possible to be "morally justified" in stealing it.
- denton-scratch 3y ago> TV streaming is a luxury good I don't agree. For many people, it's the only way to access TV. Wide access to broadcast media is a basic right, not a luxury. Some would say (me, for example) that it's neccesary for the proper functioning of civic society. Meanwhile I note that free-to-air TV has been in decline for over a decade, at least in the UK. Cable and satellite services have been stealing the broadcasters' lunch. BBC News has an ever-shrinking circle of reporters (which they nowadays refer to as "editors"). I have no use for a streaming "package"; I don't watch sports and athletics, vintage sitcoms or new-release movies. I have a Sky dish and DVR, with the basic package. I gather Sky want to move me over to streaming, which would mean I'd have to upgrade my internet service.
- ghaff 3y agoWe'll have to agree to disagree. It's hard for me to see having access to the nightly news (which I do not personally have) is necessary for the proper functioning of civic society--especially given many people have access to this over the air.
- jobs_throwaway 3y ago> I do not need this specific thing, so no one else does either
- ghaff 3y agoThe parent made the comment that broadcast media is necessary for the proper functioning of civic society. Which seems like a very strong claim.
- HPsquared 3y agoThe public-sector situation is even more stark in the UK, with the existence of the licence fee. Broadcast TV has always been an "optional extra". If anything I'm half-expecting the UK to start taxing individual creators who livestream on Twitch or YouTube (or perhaps to tax the platforms, or require the viewers to have a TV licence). That would indeed be egregious.
- jobs_throwaway 3y agoYeah, you're wrong and not nearly imaginative enough. Imagine a fascist group secured monopoly rights on TV streaming. It would be morally justified to steal it. Disney is just a lessor version of that.
- HPsquared 3y agoProbably better to just... not watch their content, in that case?
- jobs_throwaway 3y agoNope, still better to consume their resources without paying
- HPsquared 3y agoWatching doesn't consume their resources, but does spread their "ideology" and create further demand (discussing a show with others, etc)
- grumpyinfosec 3y agoBut like stealing from people just because you don't like them doesn't really change the moral calculus. I'd imagine most people that steal anything don't like the victim very much. Do what you want (or what you can get away with) but the "moral" thing would be abstain from consuming the products entirely or buy them according the terms of the seller.