I haven’t read the whole thread but here’s my take on my pirating.
I’ve downloaded albums which i would never have bought, and later attended that bands concert, on the strength of that album. I also often download albums listen to them once or twice and then might not listen to them ever again.
I download movies because i can’t be bothered going to the video store, (How much is that stealing from artists do they get royalties from video rentals?)
I stole MS office if i couldn’t get it for free i’d just use open office, doesn’t make much difference to me.
I Tried to buy a copy of Windows XP media centre, but i was unable to buy it without a computer, did i steal it sure, but as i was unable to buy it legally, I really couldnt care if i’m ripping off a company,
I download TV shows, and i don’t feel guilty at all, it mostly plays on free to air, but it takes a few months to play here.
I try to buy the things i watch a lot or listen to most, or enjoy, but half the stuff i download i wouldn’t buy. Sue Me
Who, people pointing out that piracy is immoral and illegal, or the hippy cunts trying to justify their own thieving with bullshit about freedom of speech and the like?
It will be easier to discuss morals when you give up the notion that copying is stealing. They are entirely different concepts… While such misunderstandings are being put forth, any discussions of morality are moot. I don’t think you’ll find many arguing in support of theft, and nobody here is.
Yawn. Yet more semantic games from the SDMB’s criminal fraternity. Taking/using something belonging to another, without permission = stealing in the eyes of any reasonable person. The idea that they’re entirely different concepts is bullshit.
I’d agree if we were talking about physical objects here, do you consider it stealing to read someone elses newspaper over their shoulder on a train? Is that really equivalent to picking their pocket? Or robbing the newpaper publisher, depending on who you think has ownership…
No just the illiterate fucktards who can’t read the cases where it is justified, or it’s mechanisms have other positive side effects. Such as preservation of channels of free speech in areas of the world not so free.
Tell me why is it immoral to pirate a cd I legitimately bought when the disk is damaged?
Can you point to anybody who was fined by a court for downloading songs that they already have a license for? What about a single case where the RIAA sued an individual for doing that? If not, who the fuck gives a shit what the RIAA says? All that matters is what the law says; the music industry, through the RIAA, are just acting in their own self-interest, just like anybody would expect them to.
The problem is, CRSP (I hope you won’t object to that abbreviation), that the RIAA here in the US and even abroad is pushing to change the legal environment so that what they say is what the law says. And they’ve had remarkable success in that by distorting what is going on with the whole ‘piracy/theft’ issue.
This isn’t to mean that I support many of the arguments put forth by the more vocal advocates of taking what they may, but I’m also well aware that many years old definitions of what might constitute “Fair Use” are being attacked with legislation, even if no prosecutions have occurred. Yet. So long as those laws remain on the books, I am going to be very vociferous in defending a lot of things that push the edges of what is, and is not, electronic theft. And I am going to consider pirating software when I have what I believe to be a legitimate license for it, no matter what the copyright holder might say.
Yet it’s pirate channels that preserve my access to it. Hell piracy is safer way to get stuff, as Sony/BMG showed a year or two ago when they deliberately infected their CDs with root kit malware. Torrent sites with comments let you make use of the wisdom of the herd to see if something is safe. Can’t say the same for music label CDs anymore.
Now let me ask you a different question. What about the game where it’s antipiracy stuff disabled my ability to make a legal back of it?
The fact that someone cracked this and put online means I still have access to it. If I were to download it. Which I haven’t. I’m on dialup and the game isn’t that good.
Microsoft had to know real pirates would crack the game. This is just Microsoft trying to force me to buy a game twice. I believe I there’s a discount on the replacement so it’s $10 total, but even without economies of scale I could make and ship a replacement disk for less then $1. That’s still $9 dollars they’re trying to extort from me to play something I already own.
How about all those lawsuits by the RIAA for doing absolutely fucking nothing? will that be enough? Lets start with this one. How about suing people who don’t even own a fucking computer? Hell they are even going against non humans. You seriously expect anyone to feel even the slightest bit of remorse or moral qualms about piracy? are you fucking kidding me?
This whole fustercluck boils down to a philosophical discussion about who should own works of performance art.
In centuries past, the idea of owning a song or a play would have seemed like owning the air. You make up a song to play, someone likes it, they play it for someone else, and so it goes.
The intent behind the modern concept of copyright is to make performance art profitable enough to foster innovation.
Bottom line, there needs to be a balance between these interests. There is no fundamental right or wrong on this. I personally believe that the balance has swung way too far in favor of copyright owners. Regardless, the balance is whatever the majority says it is. But entrenched interests often cause the law to lag behind popular opinion, and so here we are.
So we are figuring it out as we go, and all the self righteous name callers in this thread can just suck my ass.
Considering that I’ve spent the afternoon trying to dislodge SecuRom from my laptop I would have to agree. Its completely jacked my RW DVD drive because it won’t let me install software on a DVD that I fucking paid for. If the makers of this software lose money to pirating its their own damn faults for using a protection system that makes software disks unusable.
QFT, retail software is a hazard to the stability of your system.
Buying software from the store and it stands a decent chance of crippling windows.
Preferably your options are to find an open source software that does the same thing, or use the pirate version if there isn’t an open source version available, or finally just use the retail version if you’re dead certain the company and software are trust worthy.
Whether you should buy it if you use a pirate version I’ll leave to the reader’s conscience.
So to answer’s the OP’s rage filled troll; Piracy is a public service. It makes things available without the DRM locks that crash systems, and destroy your fair use rights.