886

I would still download a car if I could. 🚗 (sopuli.xyz)

submitted 2 days ago by Gork@sopuli.xyz to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

213 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] skisnow@lemmy.ca -2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

the pirate would not have bought the copy anyways, but having free copies of the content available on the internet decreases the desire

Also, the person deciding whether or not they "would have" paid for it, has a strong incentive to kid themselves that they wouldn't. Imagine if cinemas worked that way, and you could just walk in and announce that you weren't going to buy a ticket anyway and since there's a seat over there still empty it's not going to cost them anything for you to sit in it. They'd go out of business by the end of the week.

Also also, either the thing you're copying has value that arose from the effort of creating it, or it doesn't. If it's of value, then it's reasonable to expect payment for it. It's it's not of value, then you shouldn't miss not having it.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

Also also, either the thing you're copying has value that arose from the effort of creating it, or it doesn't. If it's of value, then it's reasonable to expect payment for it. It's it's not of value, then you shouldn't miss not having it.

Doesn't this contradict the whole rest of the argument? It either has value or it doesn't. It being available for free somewhere doesn't change the value. If it's not of value, then they shouldn't miss you having it.

[-] skisnow@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Not really, because obviously nobody who sincerely believed it was of no value would spend their time downloading it. The contradiction is in simultaneously claiming that something is of no value and therefore shouldn’t be paid for, whilst still expending effort to illegally copy it, this proving that it did have value. The only way to square it would be to claim that you’re the one who created new value by the act of downloading it, which is blatantly nonsense.

[-] jwmgregory@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

it’s not blatant nonsense. jesus fucking christ you people lack a brain.

the art/media/fucking whatever intellectual “property” = no intrinsic value, worthless itself

the labor to create the art = valuable

the labor to distribute the art, be it through “legitimate” or pirated means = valuable

it’s that simple. there needn’t even be any long moral/ethical arguments. piracy is righteous because information deserves to be free. there is no way to enforce ownership of information without wanton violence from the state.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (5 replies)

this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2025

886 points (96.2% liked)