549

It doesn't matter if it's a CD, a Film, or manual with the instructions to build a spaceship. If you copy it, the original owner doesn't lose anything. If you don't copy it, the only one missing something (the experience) is YOU.

Enjoy!

Of course, if you happen to have some extra money for donations to creators, please do so. If you don't have that, try contributing with a review somewhere or recommending the content, spread the word. Piracy was shown to drive businesses in several occasions by independent and biased corps (trying to show the opposite).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] shrugal@lemm.ee 19 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Depends on how you define stealing.

If you say it's taking something away from the original owner then you're right, but if you say it's not paying your share of the costs of a good you're using then you're wrong. E.g. if you go to a concert and don't pay the entrance fee then the concert will probably still happen, but you're not reimbursing the artists and crew for their costs and effort.

[-] maynarkh@feddit.nl 20 points 7 months ago

Yeah, but then the "tax optimization" done by the wealthy is grand theft.

[-] dhhyfddehhfyy4673@fedia.io 15 points 7 months ago

Depends on how you define stealing.

Well you should probably use the actual definition. Copying information is never stealing. Whether or not piracy is ethical is a debate you can engage in if you want, but either way, it's still not theft. Words have meanings.

[-] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 12 points 7 months ago

Concert would be something like theft of service. Lights, etc, aren't free.

Copying something is nothing more than copyright infringement, period.

Calling it stealing is disingenuous, at best.

"Stealing" requires a tangible item which would otherwise be sold.

Take someone to court and charge them with theft for copying a CD, and see how fast the judge throws it out (hint: it would never make it before a judge).

[-] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 10 points 7 months ago

There's nothing morally wrong with the hypothetical concert goer in my opinion. Maybe my opinion is radical but i don't think there's any morality in buying things either.

Hell i'll go a step further! I think unless you're stealing from a fellow citizen take that shit bro/sis. Ill cheer you on.

Too much wage theft out there for me to give a fuck about some kid stealing a PlayStation from a walmart

[-] MeetInPotatoes@lemmy.ml 8 points 7 months ago

I think we need to separate giving a fuck from morally wrong. I know that even stealing from Walmart is morally wrong because two wrongs don't make a right as the old saying goes, but more importantly, by living in this society and reaping its benefits, we agree to abide by its rules too. Justification is way too easy of an exercise to have any bearing on what's acceptable.

That being said...I also don't even give a fraction of a fuck about someone stealing from Walmart.

We can admit that something is wrong without caring if it's enforced or not. Kind of like solo drivers being in the carpool lane. Wrong? Yes. Care? Not a chance. They've made their own risk/reward calculations in each case.

[-] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Well said. There is a difference between them, but as for me i truly separate the idea of "morality" from the buying and selling (or stealing) of goods. I don't think it's wrong, at all.

Stealing from your fellows is a separate issue.

[-] borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I’m with @the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works here, I had no idea I had a radical opinion but I also don’t think theft of physical goods is morally wrong.

“If what you seek ain’t free, then steal it. If it ain’t necessity, you don’t need it. Just leave what’s left for those who come next.”

[-] Chozo@fedia.io 5 points 7 months ago

Depends on how you define stealing.

Pirates love to use a definition of "theft" that puts the entire definition on the victim, instead of their own actions. They use definitions like "depriving the original owner", instead of "taking what doesn't belong to them".

[-] borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 7 months ago

The legal definition definitely involves physical objects being removed from their owners possession though.

[-] BolexForSoup@kbin.social 2 points 7 months ago

But in this analogy, wouldn’t it be that somebody is going to a concert and not paying? Or am I misunderstanding the analogy?

[-] skookumasfrig@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 months ago

You're right. Here's the difference though. With "piracy" they can estimate how many copies have been "stolen" and deduct that from their taxable income.

this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2024
549 points (100.0% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54520 readers
288 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS