3 ms·
A thought experiment: What if he was facilitating access to child pornography rather than Hollywood films would people be as outraged? More so? Less so? If the
by epo 14y ago
A thought experiment: What if he was facilitating access to child pornography rather than Hollywood films would people be as outraged? More so? Less so?
If the suggestion of an income of up to £50,000 per month is even in the correct ballpark then this character was in the business of profiting hugely from copyright infringment and the jail time is appropriate.
The outrage about this is just windbaggery from thieves bemoaning the fact that they can't steal with impunity. And yes, depriving people of income is theft. Don't want to pay for a movie? Then watch something else.
- derekp7 14y ago"depriving people of income is theft" So if someone comes out with a competing product to mine, and splits the market in half, I lose (was deprived of) half my income. Was that theft? I think a more appropriate phrasing is "a government granted exclusive monopoly is a property right -- anyone violating that exclusivity is devaluing that property" which itself may be just as bad as theft (or more likely vandalism -- if someone takes my car, or destroys it on site, the damage is the same).
- vacri 14y agoToo much of this debate is around how to define 'theft'. Really the issue is that folks are accessing a service providing entertainment (movie, tv show, game, music) without paying the requested fee by those who provided it. Whether or not it fits into the various definitions of theft people throw around is largely immaterial.