• _sideffect@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    5 months ago

    Isn’t a car a form of art since it was designed? So you should steal a car too?

    Come on.

    • bassomitron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’m not an advocate for unlimited pirating, but this is a poor analogy. Stealing is taking something from someone, as in the previous owner no longer possesses that item. Pirating digital media is not taking anything from anyone, as it’s digital and thus still exists. This is why the courts do not call pirating theft, they call it copyright infringement.

        • laughterlaughter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          The parent poster was simply replying to the ridiculous car analogy. He even addressed part of your argument.

      • _sideffect@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        I disagree completely.

        What about pure digital releases? Where 100% of the profits come from sales?

        My analogy was spot on, and I don’t care if all your feelings are hurt so it’s downvoted.

        Stealing is stealing, stop trying to justify it in the name of art and sharing.

        Textbooks don’t only get digital releases. If everyone started to pirate it all the time, the author would not make any money at all.

        Keep lying to yourselves about why you steal things.

        • Nelots@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          5 months ago

          To preface this, I do agree it’s not morally correct to pirate. At BEST it’s morally neutral, and usually it’s not even that. I don’t know why people think they’re entitled to another person’s work without paying just because it’s “art”. They’re not.

          However…

          I completely disagree that your analogy is spot on. If I have zero plans to ever buy a certain car, but then one day decide to just steal it to see if it’s fun to drive, that car can no longer be sold to somebody else and the dealership or whatever just lost a lot of money.

          On the other hand, if I have no plans to ever buy a game, but decide to pirate it to see if it’s actually fun, the developers don’t lose money from that. I never would have bought it in the first place, and they can still sell it to others because I didn’t actually take it from them.

          That’s the difference. Now, if I had already planned on buying it but decided, “nah I’ll just pirate it instead”, then I would agree they’re losing out on a potential sale. That’s still different from losing a car though, because the dealership isn’t only losing a potential sale, they’re also losing an item in limited supply that takes physical time and labor to make (as opposed to just fabricating another Steam key).

          • _sideffect@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Ok, I do agree with your updated statement, that if you pirate something to see how it is then buy it, that you’re still buying the item and giving money to the creators.

            But the sentiment in here seems to be that “art and creation should be shared among all for free”.

            • Nelots@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              5 months ago

              I mean, maybe it should be. Maybe the government should be paying artists instead like somebody else suggested somewhere. Idk, it’s an interesting topic. But that’s in these peoples ideal world that we clearly do not live in. I am in complete agreement that, pirating all forms of art being the morally just thing to do (like the very first commenter suggested), is very incorrect. At least in our timeline it is.

        • Zeroxxx@lemmy.id
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Yep, stealing is stealing. This mob mentality exists on self-declared righteous people on Lemmy.

          I can even totally understand ‘I pirate because I don’t have moneh, it’s not the right thing to do but alas!’

          At least the thief acknowledges, unlike these Lemmy people.

        • Thelie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Textbooks don’t only get digital releases. If everyone started to pirate it all the time, the author would not make any money at all.

          Maybe you should start looking into academic publishing and the amount of money authors get for their work in this field. Spoiler: It’s a laughable fraction of the book prices.

        • bassomitron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Reading comprehension is key. I wasn’t advocating anything, I was simply pointing out that even the law disagrees with you. Pirating digital goods is not theft, it is copyright infringement.

        • Joe@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          5 months ago

          If that involves stifling other’s creativity and harming society, then I’d argue no.

          Realistically, it is a balancing act.

          Copyright, patent and even trademark laws should promote sustainable creativity and societal progress. They try to achieve this by granting some extra (non-intrinsic) rights to creators.

          That these are regularly abused to stifle competition and creativity in the name of profit is a cancer deserving treatment.

          And faced with an imperfect world: If any law or its implementation feels unjust, then most people will feel morally OK with breaking it.