• Zoolander
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -76 months ago

    Well, that’s a different argument. I believe it is also dishonest to have a “Buy” button for something you don’t actually get to own (that’s bullshit).

    Digital media should be bought the same way as physical media.

    If I had my way, you’d be able to watch media first and then decide to pay for it. Better yet, you pay for it in advance, watch whatever you want, and then decide how your payment got divided up amongst the artists and creators that you feel deserve your money for their work.

    Stealing this stuff, which is what piracy does (and ai have no issue with for all kinds of reasons), only results in the people who made things you want to watch not getting paid to make that stuff.

    • Refurbished Refurbisher
      link
      6
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Stealing this stuff, which is what piracy does (and I have no issue with for all kinds of reasons), only results in the people who made things you want to watch not getting paid to make that stuff.

      Would make sense if the artist was independent, but corporations pay either a wage or a salary. It is rare for an artist to be paid a percentage of revenue for that product, so the only ones who would be affected by piracy are the corporations who did not directly create the art.

      If I had my way, you’d be able to watch media first and then decide to pay for it. Better yet, you pay for it in advance, watch whatever you want, and then decide how your payment got divided up amongst the artists and creators that you feel deserve your money for their work.

      That would be great, but that is not the case for the vast majority of media. Generally-speaking, media is encumbered with DRM, which prevents the consumer from being able to copy the data or watch it in any way they deem fit (see: streaming services requiring hardware DRM for 4K streaming, even when they charge extra for it)

      Well, that’s a different argument. I believe it is also dishonest to have a “Buy” button for something you don’t actually get to own (that’s bullshit).

      So, given that this is not an option for the vast majority of content, the only alternative where consumers maintain full control over their own media-playing devices is to download a DRM-free copy.

      As Gabe Newell famously said, piracy is a service issue. Steam also has the same problem of lack of ownership and DRM, though, so its users are at the mercy of Valve to not revoke access to purchases.

      GOG is one company who does it right, IMO. Sell only DRM-free copies of games, and allow people to download their copy and back it up to whatever media they want to put it on. This type of practice is rare in the media world, though. Most media companies require DRM on their product in order to license it out.

      Also on the first point, independent producers of content generally don’t put DRM on their work anyway, so no reason not to buy their work.

      • Zoolander
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -76 months ago

        This is an entirely separate and dishonest argument. I’m not arguing anything related to DRM or the structure of the market that creates some content.

        • Refurbished Refurbisher
          link
          6
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          This is an entirely separate and dishonest argument.

          My point about DRM is highly relevant in this case, because a consumer cannot own something that is encumbered with DRM. They are renting a license for that product, even if the button they click on says “purchase”, since, hidden in the EULA somewhere, the company decided to redefine the word “purchase”. The company will always be able to revoke that license without notice or permission from the consumer, let alone a refund or any kind of compensation.

          Relevant Louis Rossmann video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4GZUCwVRLs

          • Zoolander
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -66 months ago

            Again, it is not relevant because I’m not arguing against the OP. I am only arguing against the dishonesty and mischaracterization of piracy as being something other than stealing.

            • Refurbished Refurbisher
              link
              46 months ago

              If you go up to someone riding their bike and you steal their bike, that is stealing; if you stop someone on their bike in order to 3D scan it, so that you can then 3D print a new one, that is copying, and the bike owner still has their original bike.

              • Zoolander
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -26 months ago

                And if everyone just scanned that one person’s bike, then the company that makes that bike would go out of business, the people that work there can’t make bikes anymore because they aren’t getting paid to design, manufacture, and build them, and the person who paid for their bike would be left wondering why you are entitled to something for free that they had to pay for.

                This is like stating the chicken and the egg problem and then brushing it off as “I have a way to copy chickens indefinitely. I don’t need eggs.” without realizing that you needed not just eggs to even be able to make the first chicken to copy but also land, farms, farmers, food, and everything else that went into making the chicken you copied like an entitled, spoiled child.

                • Refurbished Refurbisher
                  link
                  46 months ago

                  And if everyone just scanned that one person’s bike, then the company that makes that bike would go out of business, the people that work there can’t make bikes anymore because they aren’t getting paid to design, manufacture, and build them, and the person who paid for their bike would be left wondering why you are entitled to something for free that they had to pay for.

                  Then why are companies who have clones made of their products still in business?

                  • Zoolander
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    -2
                    edit-2
                    6 months ago

                    You’re only unintentionally (I think) proving my point, not yours.

                    Companies who make clones of things are still in business because people are paying for the clones. You’re not paying for the cloned movie you’re pirating.

                    Also, in your example and using your logic, someone would have to recreate the production of the content. If someone decided to remake a movie (and get actors, crew, production, marketing, etc.) and then decided to release that for free, not only would it not be stealing but it also wouldn’t be copyright infringement because it would be covered by fair use since its a recreation. Copyright infringement doesn’t apply simply to an idea of something. It applies to the manifestation of that idea.

    • Venia Silente
      link
      fedilink
      English
      26 months ago

      Stealing this stuff, which is what piracy does (and ai have no issue with for all kinds of reasons), only results in the people who made things you want to watch not getting paid to make that stuff.

      Are you saying that if I pirate a movie from 2019, the actors have not been paid for their screentime yet and won’t be paid until I buy the movie in, like, 2028?