• 𝔄𝔩𝔩𝔞𝔫@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 years ago

    I’m amused at these statements these ‘wannabe’ pirates make to justify piracy. A smart person would pirate quietly without letting the world know or justifying it.

    I know why I do it & I don’t want some validation, internet points, 2 minutes of fame to sound / look cool.

      • TommySalami@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Theres some truth to this, but a lot of people do use this as a shield against the general cultural acceptance that piracy is stealing or otherwise morally underhanded. I do it, but I don’t have any illusion I’m one of the activists. I just get indignant and refuse to pay someone for content or entertainment who I think is damaging to the medium or predatory in general. I feel like if I really wanted to make a statement, I just wouldn’t consume their work at all – but life is short and I want to have my cake and eat it too.

    • quirzle@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      I don’t want some validation, internet points, 2 minutes of fame to sound / look cool.

      No, you just need everyone to know you don’t care about sounding/looking cool to sound/look cool. Totally different.

      • MajorHavoc@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Yeah. And, in fairness, as a non-pirate, I read along here for tips and tricks to get a non-shit streaming experience out of my home hosted hardware.

        If I could still pay for a non-shit streaming experience, I would just do that.

  • crunchpaste@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Do we really need excuses for pirating media?

    I pirate movies because I think digital access to them is overpriced, goes to the copyright holder instead of the creators, it’s convenient and most importantly because I can.

    I can’t pirate going to the cinema, nor can I afford to build my own, therefore I gladly pay to have a seat and enjoy a movie there.

    Edit: I thought this may be relevant to the movies example I gave. I don’t think movie studios, giving nothing back to society after massive profits are the ones we should debate the morals of stealing with.

  • what@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Until we live in a world where people have equal access to information and essential technology piracy is a moral imperative.

    Should something which costs a few hours worth of work in the developed word cost three weeks worth of work in a less developed country, just to make a publishing company worth tens or hundreds of millions of dollars a few extra bucks? Of course not!

    Every other argument is a moot point to me. If I hadn’t pirated Photoshop and other software when I was a poor kid I wouldn’t have the six figure career I have today. The ultrarich steal from us every day in more ways than I can count. Maybe when they start being held accountable I will start caring about their bottom line.

  • Sentinian@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Can we not become subreddit by posting this shitty screenshots trying to justify our reasons? Just share your media and enjoy it.

    • _number8_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      what do you mean trying to justify? discussion of shitty anti consumer tactics in digital media is perfectly valid

      • Sentinian@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        A screenshot of some comment is not really discussion though. This is a pretty base level understanding of the concept, which is why I say it’s more cope then actual discussion.

        • denemdenem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          This is one of the most popular posts this week here with more than 4 HUNDRED comments. I don’t know what you view as a discussion but I think this was a pretty successful attempt at creating one.

          • Sentinian@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            I will say this thread had way more discussion then I was expecting when I originally posted this. My point about the screenshot still stands, I would much prefer we discuss something new related to sharing media, instead of recycling the same discussion about why its justified to copyright infringe.

  • snor10@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Our current system of copyright is flawed and only serves the interests of corporations.

  • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    I think this logic is silly.

    Employers don’t own you, so witholding wages for services you provided isn’t stealing. Getting a haircut and not paying isn’t stealing.

    I think the better justification is: rights holders make it a pain in the arse to access content affordably, so fuck you, just going to steal it.

    • mineapple@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      You’re only partly right. You example services. Of course it is not possible to own services. Piracy is only applicable to products. The point of the Twitter guy is, that companies intentionally stop selling their software etc. as products to sell you the same thing as a service, so that you cannot own it.

      • noisetricks@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        I think you slightly missed the point too. I think he meant that even when you buy games for example (or any other software).You don’t actually buy the game. You only buy a license to use that software.

  • Starchiver@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    This is what I’ve been saying. We don’t even own digital products, all it takes is a server to be taken down or an account to be lost and all you bought is taken away. Pirating also can’t be stealing because we aren’t taking something away from someone else, other people are not deprived of the chance to have this just because we downloaded it.

  • Gsus4@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Major reason not to buy ebooks from amazon: you can’t lend, give, exchange, sell them and you may lose all of them if you anger the right people. They are not yours, you are not buying them, you merely paid for conditioned access to them.

    • Mango@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s my YouTube comment. You and so many others are making me feel like a badass. 😎

  • Retirix_YT@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    To be completely frank, I couldn’t care less if it’s stealing or not. They should sell their shit for cheaper if their companies care so much, which I’m not sure they really do.

  • narshee@iusearchlinux.fyi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    This is inaccurate. You are not buying it (the media), you are buying the right to stream it (as long as the seller provides the media as a stream). You don’t “buy” a movie unless you are paying for it’s ownership, which would be millions of dollars. For physical releases you buy the disk and the right to watch it under certain conditions (DRM). And you generally don’t have a right be able to “buy” or have access to all media.

    But all that doesn’t automaticly make it amoral. this comment is gonna be downvoted to hell

    edit: There are probably gonna be more responces, so this will address everything else I have to say. What I wrote is how things are legally, more or less. I don’t like that either. I do consider piracy stealing (under current laws) and morally right. Stealing is just not that great term for digital stuff. Please don’t try to (uselessly) sway me and don’t infight

    • Melkor@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      That’s kind of their point, because we are not in fact buying the media the argument is that piracy has some moral element. Put another way there is no option to own it outside of piracy.

    • Kissaki@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      For physical releases you buy the disk and the right to watch it under certain conditions (DRM).

      I’d like to point out German law (maybe this expands to EU and other countries) with traditional media.

      Traditionally you bought movies and music on physical discs. You had a guaranteed right to be able to sell it to other people, as well as make personal copies of it for private use/backups.

      DRM has always tried to oppose this right. And obviously, in the last decade(s) a lot went into service-oriented streaming and temporary access instead of owning even on a partial or theoretical level.

    • Quetzacoatl@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      this meme is a criticism of that. it shouldn’t be like that. if I buy a chair, I own the chair. I can then choose to sit on it, burn it, or give it to my neighbor, whatever. if I buy a movie, it’s suddenly not like that – but not because of some inherent quality that would make it impossible, but only because they say it is like that. but they have one weakness: it’s only like that if we actually stick to those rules. they’re all arbitrary anyway! we can therefore treat a bought movie just as it should be: a physical copy that we actually own. we can then decide to watch it, to lend it to our neighbor, to play it for everybody to see on the street, to cut it and remix it and do something new with it. will they come and claim we’ve “pirated” their media? yes of course, but this is nonsensical, dead law, that has to be broken again and again by just – ignoring it, and making it not so. if I buy a movie, I do own the movie, and the company that says otherwise can get fucked. that’s what this is about.

  • LeHappStick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Here I am wondering why there is still a downvote button in the YouTube comments… it does nothing!

    • BeegYoshi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Actually it’s worse than nothing. Youtube promotes comments based on engagement, so while only an upvote increases the tally, voting at all still makes it more visible.

    • Poob@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      The same reason that a lot of crosswalks have fake buttons. So you feel like you have control.

  • WigglingWalrus@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    How does that work though if you rent a car? You don’t own it, but still stealing if you “steal” it.

    • atlasraven31@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      You’re preventing its use by someone else (assuming you bring it back in one piece).