Any thieves out there who have deluded themselves into thinking there is nothing wrong with doing this?
Please, no one jump in with a pedantic tangential hijack. I don’t care if you downloaded a copy of Microsoft Office because you lost the one you paid for.
The Pit seemed like the better place to put this…
Ohohoh me!
I believe that the technology and infrastructure that drives piracy is also the technology that can provide freedom of speech in situations where information is restricted. The free flow of information is an essential part of freedom, and piracy creates things that assure the free flow of information. So I support pirates because I support their technology. Yay pirates!
What a ridiculous statement. I have nothing against freedom of speech and the free flow of information, but the same technology and infrastructure that drives piracy also drives child pornography. Does that mean you’re a supporter of pedophiles as well?
In any case - the fact that the technology used for piracy has some positive utility doesn’t make piracy itself any less wrong.
I’m sure it’s illegal and immoral. Don’t give a fuck. Don’t give a fuck what you think, either.
Hey, as long as you’re not lying to yourself. What drives me nuts are people who think it’s perfectly fine, that the only things that have value are physical objects.
I don’t think physical objects have value either. Now what?
Give me all your valueless possessions, please.
You don’t have to actually ship me anything. I’ll just mail you a contract, you can sign it, and then I’ll collect the stuff at my leisure.
If you are unhappy with this proposal, why? By definition, if something is worthless, you shouldn’t have any reason to want to keep it.
I’ve always wondered about the “Yeah I’m immoral and a lawbreaker, so what of it”, mindset. Is it a craving for attention? Does it make you feel important? Why do you not care about doing what is right?
“Theft” as a concept is still relevant in the information age, but the exact definition of that concept, not to mention its practical application, is due for reconsideration.
Personally, the only time I steal without feeling guilty, is when whoever owns the rights to some obscure movie can’t be cheesed to get off their ass and make it available. In that case, I’ll gladly acquire it any way I can. They’re not making money off of it, though they could’ve if they’d made it available to me legally. No theft involved there. If it’s available but I just don’t think it’s worth what it costs, then I feel guilty for stealing it. That’s theft.
I think the copyright laws have gotten completely out of control. I think “death+75” is obnoxious and outrageous. I also think it should not be possible for the owner of a song, for example, to refuse permission to use it. They can charge a fee, but they shouldn’t be able to refuse. Or to demand a high enough price that it’s the same as refusing it. If you don’t want your art to part of the common, whatever, marketplace? then don’t publish it. Keep it in your drawer. Once you’ve allowed it to become part of the white noise of modern infoculture, fine, make a living off of it, but that white noise is part of my world, too.
So to reiterate, or clarify, as an artist of course I believe that the creator of an original work’s ability to profit from that work should be protected. But that should not be absolute; the consumer of that original work should have some rights too.
That’s absurd. The infrastructure that piracy creates–not the other way around–drives the exchange of all kinds of objectionable things, just like the videocamera, the printing press, the Internet itself, and the federal highway system do. That doesn’t make any of those infrastructures invalid, or imply that anyone who supports the things that inspire them also supports all of the nefarious things that minority groups use them for. That’s like saying, “Oh, you like newspapers? You must support the Racial Slaughter Daily.”
I personally believe that property is theft. I don’t steal physical property, though, because someone else owns those things outright before they’re stolen and does not own them after they’re stolen. It’s not that person’s fault that the system we live in requires us to amass physical property.
But comparing intellectual property to physical property is a non-starter. They’re two different things. This cuts both ways: for example, I believe that stealing an idea and using it to make millions of dollars for oneself should carry far stiffer penalties than stealing, say, a car. But when unlike stealing an idea, stealing a song or a piece of software does not leave the previous owner owning less than they owned before. Let me put it this way:
“So you steal music…would you steal a car too?”
“Well, if I had a robot that would steal cars for me while I’m sleeping, such that the people I stole from still had their cars afterward, then, yes, I would.”
That doesn’t necessarily follow. “Without monetary value” does not mean the same thing as “worthless”. You’re moving the goalposts.
Why must there be some ulterior motive? Maybe he just really wants Photoshop and doesn’t think Adobe deserves several hundred dollars for it. It could very well be as simple as that. Since he didn’t go into any further detail, speculating about ulterior motives is pure silliness.
We should also consider that the music industry considered radio theft at first, and that jazz musicians at the beginning of the era of recorded music often refused to record their stuff, thinking that other musicians would steal their techniques. Definitions of these things change as technology progresses. It’s worth reconsidering the meaning of the word “theft” in this context.
I asked a question. The post was “I know it’s wrong, but I don’t give a fuck” not “I know it’s wrong, but I don’t want to give people who I think don’t deserve it, my money”. I want to know why what is right and wrong doesn’t matter to this person. Not a huge deal, at least in the case of pirating $20 movies, but I’m intrigued by the whole “I’m a rebel” mindset.
Sure it’s theft. There are some mitigating factors that would alleviate my guilt somewhat (if I *were *a pirate)—exorbitant pricing, the inconvenience of DRM—but in the end, you’re taking something without paying for it. But what if I, say, download episodes of a TV show that aired on a channel I subscribe to via satellite/cable? Fundamentally, is there any damage done, considering that I would skip past the commercials if I watched the show on my pay service anyway?
I can’t defend speeding, or drinking before you are 21 or smocking pot or any of the other laws people constantly chose to break. So how about defending yourself criminal, or are you gonna sit there and tell me you don’t pick and chose which laws are fitting to obey and which aren’t?
Are you joking?
Okay, in this situation, you’re not stealing from the owner of the car. But what about the people who make their money by designing cars, and then selling them? You’re stealing from them, by benefitting from their work without compensating them for it.
Oh, for Christ’s sake. The term was “I don’t think physical objects have value”. In what world do you live that “without value” is not a synonym for “worthless”? Value is a synonym for worth. “without value” -> valueless -> worthless
Money is just a convenience for expressing value.
How is it his right to determine how much Adobe can charge for their software? What if everyone wanted Photoshop for free? Should Adobe just give it away?
Do you think Adobe should just let people download their software for free and ask for donations? Do you think Photoshop would still exist if they did that?
Awww, did someone upload their first song to itunes or write their first piece of software?
No, I don’t think so. That is an interesting topic in itself, but I’d like to avoid corrupting the discussion with gray areas. There are plenty of people who have trouble with the basic black and white issues.
I expect he/she is responding to this IMHO thread, and wasn’t in an IMHO mood.
As for my opinion, it depends on circumstances. Although I personally don’t pirate, and simply do without a lot of things I’d like to buy, but don’t want to inflict the “protections” on my computer. I do think that, for example, buying a legal copy but never using it, but actually using a pirated copy is ethical. And yes, people do that; you can actually trust the criminals more than the law abiding to not wreck your system.
I don’t care about the laws. I’m talking about morality. If it was legal to pirate content, I’d still think it was immoral (and hey, guess what, there would be a hell of a lot less content to steal).
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with this.