• Zoolander
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -185 months ago

    No it’s not. If you don’t pay for it, you don’t watch it. If they’re not entitled to your money, then you’re not entitled to the product of their time, effort, and labor.

    • Refurbished Refurbisher
      link
      125 months ago

      Then why is digital piracy legally considered to be copyright infringement instead of theft?

      • Zoolander
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -165 months ago

        That’s irrelevant. I’m not arguing the legality of it.

    • the post of tom joad
      link
      fedilink
      85 months ago

      If i could just teleport into your house so i could liberate your keyboard, i would. Because your take is so collosally stupid that it actually angers me that you have it.

      Like real, palpable rage that this insipid argument still exists in this world, after all this time.

      • Zoolander
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -125 months ago

        Ahh yes… the tried and true ad-hominem. No actual argument against the point, just childish name-calling and insults. Grow the fuck up.

        • the post of tom joad
          link
          fedilink
          105 months ago

          An ad hominem would be if i avoided your point and instead attacked you as a person. I attacked the point itself as frivolous and years-debunked. Please… Listen… Your keyboard is suffering under the weight of false premise. Free it, please

          • Zoolander
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -55 months ago

            You did not address the point at all. Nothing has been debunked. It cannot be debunked because it’s true - you are stealing something someone created, which they made in order to get paid and make a living, because you are ingesting it and not paying them.

            Stop being dishonest.

            • the post of tom joad
              link
              fedilink
              4
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Provide to me a copy/paste definition of “false premise” so i know you know more fallacies than “strawman” and “ad hominem”. If i feel you learned something today ill call our little tete a tete a win.

              (That was ad-hominem)

              • Zoolander
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -25 months ago

                I don’t need to provide you with shit. Look at you, expecting to get someone else’s effort and time for free again. Thanks for proving you’re dishonest.

                • the post of tom joad
                  link
                  fedilink
                  4
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  Youre getting angry now i think. Whatever fruit this may have borne has withered. Last salvo and ill be finished:

                  I honestly want you to read about false premise, and i (selfishly) want proof that you have bettered yourself. If you don’t want to (and frankly, i don’t blame you) then would you at least pinky swear you’ll read it later?

                  (Spoiler: ‘false premises’ don’t necessarily invalidate an argument, just make the ground is on shakier. ) There’s a lot to read, and a lot to learn. Here, i’ll link it. It’s real. Go check it out.

                  Believe it or not, reading thru the definition will make you better at defending this point in the future. Youre gonna all the tools available if youre going with this stance, and that’s what you want, right? You’re not just coming on this forum to run your mouth, right? Your comments have purpose, yes? You will need tools to convince, and you are in dire need of a toolbox

                  • Zoolander
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    -15 months ago

                    I’m not angry. I haven’t even thought about what you said before, even after you just mentioned it.

                    I’m not doing anything you ask me to because I know what a false premise is, I know what ad hominem is, and I know what a straw man is. You haven’t actually provided any kind of argument against what I said so I know you’re not being honest. Since you’re not willing to be honest, there is no point in continuing discussion with you.

          • Zoolander
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -75 months ago

            That’s not what ad-hominem is, “dude”. It’s still a superficial attack rather than an attack of the argument if there’s no substance to it to actually dispute the argument.

            • @Psychodelic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              25 months ago

              ad-hominem (adj.): (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

              Why did I have to look this up for you?

              Think of it this way, saying your argument is stupid is similar to saying your argument is not valid, not sound, etc. Your response should be “why is it stupid?” or what’s wrong with my way of thinking?", not “stop attacking me, I’m under attack!” At the very least, don’t misappropriate a logical fallacy that doesn’t apply.

              • Zoolander
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -1
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                He clearly directed the attack at me since he wants to come into my house and smash my keyboard or whatever the fuck he said. Introducing pedantry to the mix isn’t useful or helpful.

                The point is that he didn’t provide any counter to the argument. He’s done nothing to address the actual argument and has simply made an attack. I don’t need to argue the semantics of it unless they care to actually address the points I’m making.

                • @M0oP0o@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  05 months ago

                  Introducing pedantry to the mix isn’t useful or helpful.

                  I agree.

                  You should also take your own advice and address the actual argument and points made.

    • @null@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      45 months ago

      That’s a valid opinion. It doesn’t change the fact that the crime is copyright infringement, not theft.

      • Zoolander
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -45 months ago

        I’m not arguing the legal or criminal semantics. I’m arguing the dishonest justification and misrepresentation of piracy. Piracy is stealing. You’re stealing income from the creator if you ingest their work without paying for it. I don’t care if people pirate things but admit that it’s stealing and move on.

        • @null@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          45 months ago

          Piracy is stealing.

          No it is not. By any definition.

          You can think it’s morally wrong, that’s fine. But it simply, factually is not stealing.

          That’s the only point I’m making.

          • Zoolander
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -25 months ago

            Then we’ll have to agree to disagree. It doesn’t matter how many levels of abstraction or semantics you hide it behind, you’re gaining from something made by another person without returning that gain (whether financially or otherwise) to that person.

            • @null@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              15 months ago

              You’re welcome to disagree with any standardized definition you like. Seems like a pretty unwise thing to do, but that’s your prerogative.

              • Zoolander
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -15 months ago

                Someone else posted the definition of stealing in this thread elsewhere. If I gain something from someone without giving them what they’ve demanded in return, it’s stealing.

                • @null@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  15 months ago

                  To steal something, you must actually take something away from someone, such that they do not have that thing anymore.

                  That’s not how piracy works.

                  • Zoolander
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    -15 months ago

                    No, you do not. If you hire someone to make you a website/video/picture and then don’t pay them after they’ve created it, you’re stealing from them. You can argue the semantics of that all day long and say that it’s a different term, I don’t care. You’re stealing from someone when you gain something from their work without compensating them (if they’re asking to be compensated in exchange for that work).

    • Venia Silente
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15 months ago

      No it’s not. If you don’t pay for it, you don’t watch it.

      A friend bought a movie, invited me and 12 other people to watch it. Are we supposed to be legally required to say no?