Piracy is not theft

rambo919 said:
I don't think of it that directly, it makes no sense to me. As I stated previously.... you cannot vote with your wallet by buying everything and then deciding whether it's worth the money.... it's logically impossible to do.

You first have to consume and then decide what the worth of the content is.... you cannot do it the other way around.

On the other hand morality simply does not factor into not being able to pay.... it does start factoring in when you clearly can afford to pay but refuse to.
Click to expand...

So you want to test drive everything before paying, fine. That's a separate issue. But already convoluted as you alone cannot just decide what somethings value is. It takes the two people, buyer and seller to agree before you have a legitimate transaction.

Do you think it is acceptable for a poor person to steal just because they are poor. That's silly. Something is either wrong or it isn't. If you think pirating is wrong and you know you can't pay but you are doing the above mental gymnastics to try and justify your own actions and useing poverty as an excuse your morals are very questionable.
 
saor said:
Technically it also implies you getting something that you should've paid for. Go write a book and wait till people pirate it and see which side of the fence you stand on then.
Click to expand...
I don't want to write a book because the library will buy a copy and let any number of people read it without giving me another cent. The nerve
 
rietrot said:
So you want to test drive everything before paying, fine. That's a separate issue. But already convoluted as you alone cannot just decide what somethings value is. It takes the two people, buyer and seller to agree before you have a legitimate transaction.
Click to expand...
Digital content is abstract not physical.... you cannot apply the same rules.

rietrot said:
Do you think it is acceptable for a poor person to steal just because they are poor. That's silly. Something is either wrong or it isn't. If you think pirating is wrong and you know you can't pay but you are doing the above mental gymnastics to try and justify your own actions and useing poverty as an excuse your morals are very questionable.
Click to expand...
Again, don't confuse the abstract with the physical.

You don't deprive someone else of a copy of anything. Patronage for the effort is more appropriate here than sale of goods.
 
saor said:
The inadvertent utility of piracy is irrelevant. The ends don't justify the means etc. Downloading something you should have paid for is still wrong, even tho we all do it.
Click to expand...
And if I cannot buy it in SA? Like most good movies.
 
rambo919 said:
Digital content is abstract not physical.... you cannot apply the same rules.


Again, don't confuse the abstract with the physical.

You don't deprive someone else of a copy of anything. Patronage for the effort is more appropriate here than sale of goods.
Click to expand...
Both are physical. Digital content aren't abstract lol.
 
rietrot said:
Both are physical. Digital content aren't abstract lol.
Click to expand...
Of course digital is abstract.

You cannot evaluate it before you buy, you cannot move it, you cannot destroy it only a copy of it..... how is this physical?
 
One of the key problems is that owners of copyrights want special treatment. They want copyright to be considered property only as it suits them. They want the benefits, but not the other rules, and hence downsides, that come with it.

You want to call it property? Fine then just like physical goods I can buy it, check it out, decide it isn't for me and return it for a refund. If the material is not what I consider an adequate standard, i.e. it is faulty, I can return it and demand a repair or refund. That's right you're going to have to reshoot that film, rerecord that music, rewrite that book. People should be able to demand a replacement or refund if a comedy isn't funny or a horror isn't scary.
 
rambo919 said:
Of course digital is abstract.

You cannot evaluate it before you buy, you cannot move it, you cannot destroy it only a copy of it..... how is this physical?
Click to expand...
The data that makes up the movie is actual physical stuff that can be measured and is arrange in a specific way. It doesn't disappear when you stop looking at it. It is also stored on a physical object, harddrive, CD, whatever.

Exactly the same as an old physical book. The data is the lines of ink. The book's pages is the object it is stored on.

You can make more of it or destroy it in exactly the same way. Copying more of the data onto more of the storage device/object. Or throwing it in the bin/deleting it.

In common parlance we refer to old media as physical or new formats as digital. This is where you got confused. It is either physical or digital, Not physical or abstract. Which means something completely different.
 
saor said:
The inadvertent utility of piracy is irrelevant. The ends don't justify the means etc. Downloading something you should have paid for is still wrong, even tho we all do it.
Click to expand...
Expecting to be paid over and over again for the same piece of work for your entire life is wrong. Never mind the loathsome spectacle of grown children expecting to live off the work of a long dead parent.
 
rietrot said:
The data that makes up the movie is actual physical stuff that can be measured and is arrange in a specific way. It doesn't disappear when you stop looking at it. It is also stored on a physical object, harddrive, CD, whatever.

Exactly the same as an old physical book. The data is the lines of ink. The book's pages is the object it is stored on.

You can make more of it or destroy it in exactly the same way. Copying more of the data onto more of the storage device/object. Or throwing it in the bin/deleting it.

In common parlance we refer to old media as physical or new formats as digital. This is where you got confused. It is either physical or digital, Not physical or abstract. Which means something completely different.
Click to expand...
Now who is rationalizing.

Just because it is stored physically in some way does not make it physical.

For it to be physical it would need to only exist in one perpetual instance..... which it does not.

Copying a movie creates a new instance... which is it's own thing..... you are not taking the original you are creating a counterfeit..... and I myself have never cared whether something is a copy or not nor have I understood the obsession with paintings or handbags. Counterfeiting unless it's money is perfectly fine by me.
 
saor said:
You spend 2 years writing a book. Upon release I create digital copies which I make freely available on a popular e-book site and loads of people get your book for free. You don't think there's anything wrong with that? You don't think it's wrong that something you created and intended to be bought is now being freely acquired on piracy sites?

I'm still failing to see how this is framed is being morally correct behavior. Whether you sell the pirated copy is irrelevant. The wrongness creeps in the moment you acquire for free a thing that was intended for you to pay for.
Click to expand...
You're shifting the goalposts. You claimed it's wrong. Now you're trying to argue how it hurts the author when that isn't as cut and dry.

rambo919 said:
Of course digital is abstract.

You cannot evaluate it before you buy, you cannot move it, you cannot destroy it only a copy of it..... how is this physical?
Click to expand...
Actually if we go into the metaphysical your view is biased and everything is actually physical. Plato reasoned that you can only conceptualise a chair in your mind if the object physically exists on some plane. The part that's confusing you is that it's easier to create another copy of a digital work but that doesn't mean it's abstract.
 
Swa said:
Actually if we go into the metaphysical your view is biased and everything is actually physical. Plato reasoned that you can only conceptualise a chair in your mind if the object physically exists on some plane. The part that's confusing you is that it's easier to create another copy of a digital work but that doesn't mean it's abstract.
Click to expand...
Plato clearly never met the internet.....
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
Of course it's not theft, you're not stealing the original. You're making a copy. Otherwise taking a picture of the Mona Lisa and printing a life sized copy of it would also be theft...
Click to expand...
Actually you can do as you please with the Mona Lisa, as the copyright of that expired ages ago, the copyright is valid for the painter's lifetime plus an additional 70 years. Regardless of the painting having different owners, the copyright only applies to the painter.

Copyright on the The hobbit will expire in 2032 and the Fellowship of the ring in 2054 as an example, well the books at least, so literally nothing stopping you from making your own hobbit movie or 3D hobbit game, role playing board game, where the copyright of the derived work will be protected.

H. P. Lovecraft works as an example is all public domain as of 2008.As such you can do as you please, I know of an indie game developer who took advantage of this and published a steam game based on one of the books

So no it's not theft as the copyright has expired, physically stealing the Mona Lisa is another story of course.
 
In the new SA it's only considered theft when you dont pay government. Other than that its pretty much all okay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X