• TAYRN@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Buying something is owning. That has never changed.

    You don’t purchase digital goods. You buy a license to use them, under the conditions you agreed to. Piracy explicitly breaks those conditions 99.9% of the time.

    So no, it isn’t stealing. It’s just plainly illegal. And it hurts everyone from the original artist to the multi-billion dollar company that distributes it. Whether you think that is immoral or not is up to you.

    • Apollo2323@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahaha.

      Bro is just incredible how there is people defending this multibillions dollars companies. The studios don’t care about the author or the creator. They don’t care about the actresses or the singers. They don’t care about you as the consumer of this media. They only care about PROFIT.

      Sources :

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Hollywood_labor_disputes

      https://apnews.com/article/actors-strike-ends-hollywood-5769ab584bca99fe708c67d00d2ec241

      https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/17/business/hollywood-actors-sag-aftra-strike-by-the-numbers/index.html

      As you can see these executives are not compensating the actors , the writers. The actual creators of these movies and series you said " wE sHoUldN’t pIrAtE" are not even getting their good deal and let’s not talk about the music industry which is the same or worst situation for the creators.

    • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, that is the small text they use to justify it, but that’s not how they advertise it. When Amazon Prime wants me to pay for a movie it doesn’t say “License it now!” It says “Buy it now!”

      If you go digging into the EULA you’ll see it being called a license, but no effort is made to actually make that clear to the customer.

      Furthermore, being technically legal doesn’t make it acceptable. If someone opened a bookstore, and put some treatment on all their books that caused them to suddenly disintegrate after a year, it doesn’t matter if they have on all their receipts that “books are not guaranteed to last longer than a year” or that they “aren’t doing anything illegal”. It’s still a bullshit business practice that shouldn’t be tolerated.

      • illi@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        When it says “buy it” you asuume the it refers to the content - they’d probably argue it refers to the license.

        • Katana314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s worth stating this has basically always been true for books. You can buy paper. Buying bound paper with words on it is not quite the same. You can’t produce a movie from that idea, and state “I invented this idea from a bundle of bound pages I bought, that already had some words on them.”

          You never owned the original reproduction rights to the book’s content. That never mattered much until copying and pasting became so easy.

          • illi@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Huh. Never quite looked at it that way, but you are right. I can see how physical book is a form of a license to read a literary work. It is however naturally impossible to revoke. It would be the same if digital content had no DRM - which is generally not the case.

            So I guess DRM and you not being able to download and use content outside the company’s ecosystem is the real issue here.

    • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      We have another one.

      Slavery used to be legal. So it was okay?

      Right now „selling“ stuff and saying its just a license you fool is legal so it is okay?

            • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Its unimportant which example you use.

              The underlying principle is legal ≠ correct. Just because something is legal, its not necessarily morally or otherwise correct.

              Selling a movie to someone and calling it a license is highly manipulative and I think you know that.

              • TAYRN@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes, I said from the start that it might not be moral.

                But that’s exactly the point: companies sell movies to theaters, and then those theaters sell tickets to each viewer. That’s the license they each agreed to. A theater buying a movie off Amazon and then selling tickets to everyone who watched it would probably make some people upset, and would very clearly be illegal.

                • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Talk about mental gymnastics.

                  You cant sell a limited time license. That is rent, plain and simple. If you pay 3 years rent at once or monthly, its still rent.

                  If you pay for something and have to give it back, you dont actually become the „owner“.

                  And thats why people say if buying isnt owning, piracy isnt theft, plain and simple.

                  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Renting generally refers to physical goods, with the following property: when it’s being used by one party, it’s unavailable to everyone else.

                    For intellectual property, things that can be used by N people without interference between them, the term limited license is correct.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        What’s funny about your bad equivalency is that pirating is treating the people who created the content as slaves since you’re enjoying the fruit of their labour without compensating them.

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          This user you interacted with here, went on to describe this conversation as you “abusing” and “manipulating” them. They claimed that you were a troll, and started a huge thread in the Fediverse community about expanding ban powers and purging the world of people they disagree with.

          My god it’s a discussion thread on the internet, with two people disagreeing. This is what they consider trolling and abuse now.

          Look at how they responded to you disagreeing with them: https://lemmy.giftedmc.com/post/204629

        • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          And another one. There are a lot more and better ways to compensate an artist than giving money to record companies.

          Besides that, I‘m not saying dont buy artistic work, I‘m saying please pirate products of companies that try to bullshit their customers.

            • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yeah, feel free to. Always happy for one abusive person less in my lemmy experience. Reported, blocked.

                • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Considering that this account has never before interacted with me and immediately went there, they either used an alt or have severe issues with impulse control and abusive behavior.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ok, realistically, how many pirates turn around and send money to the creators, making sure that all the people involved in the creation of the content are compensated for their work?

            You don’t want to admit it but in the end you’re still taking money from the creators and if everyone was doing that then no one would create content.

            I hope pirates are happy that some people keep paying for shit.

            • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You‘re not answering my comment but repeating a set of beliefs. If you want to discuss stuff, feel free to. Otherwise kindly move along.

              • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                You’re saying there are better ways to compensate the creators, I’m saying no pirates do it, especially not in a way that would make them legally allowed to have a copy of the creators’ work.

                If you don’t want to buy a CD because you don’t want the record label to profit from your purchase and you instead buy a t-shirt and go see a show, it doesn’t give you the right to have a digital copy of the artist’s songs. What you bought is the right to see a show and to own a t-shirt and downloading a copy of their album is still taking money from the artists and all the people that worked on it.

                • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Referencing one point of my many arguments is not a discussion.

                  „Selling“ limited licences should be illegal but isnt. Legal does (evidently) not mean morally or otherwise okay. Supporting artists does not mean buying bad products, you cant prove that no pirates buy merch or use alternative methods to support creators, therefore I‘ll just ignore your statement.

                  You were the one trying to derail the topic to a cd or movie, which is not what I said.

                  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Here’s your whole argument:

                    `And another one. There are a lot more and better ways to compensate an artist than giving money to record companies.

                    Besides that, I‘m not saying dont buy artistic work, I‘m saying please pirate products of companies that try to bullshit their customers.`

                    I’m refuting the first part (which is your main argument because the second part is just another way to say the exact same thing) and my rebuttal also covers your second point (you’re punish the creators that have nothing to do with the company that’s doing bullshit).

                    You can’t prove that pirates do compensate the creators either so your argument is moot if mine is. The only way to legally have the creators content on hand is but purchasing it (license or full ownership), no other form of compensation allows you to have those files or compensates ALL the people involved.

                    As for derailing the conversation, you’re the first one who mentioned artists and compensating them in other ways, which, if you can be honest for 30 seconds, isn’t something that exists in the video game world.

                    In the end, it’s on you to just not play games that are distributed in a way that makes you reliant on a third party. Just because you’re mad it doesn’t make it ok to enjoy the work of the people who created the games that are distributed in a way you disagree with without compensating them.