• sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Corpos are not people, they deserve nothing, they are entitled to nothing.

      I don’t care what the government has to say on this issue. Useless fucking whores.

    • ddh@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      We reject the premise of the question: the onus sits with copyright holders to justify copyright protection.

  • FaceDeer@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Huh. Based on the community this was posted in, I can assume that the answer the video comes to is “yes” and not watch it. But according to Betteridge’s law of headlines the answer is “no.” I need to argue about this without watching it but I don’t know what stance to argue about.

    Ah! I’ll use the Orbit plugin to get an AI to summarize the video for me. Hm. The AI-generated summary says the video describes an anecdote about music copyright violations, talks about some ethical considerations about both music and software piracy, and then:

    The speaker concludes by acknowledging the complexity of the issue and the importance of considering the perspectives of all parties involved.

    So I guess the answer was “Maybe?” How am I supposed to have a pointless Internet argument about “Maybe?”

    Bah. Someone attack me for using AI, at least that’s a debate I can sink my teeth into.

    • Sturgist@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Lazy prick! Should have just put the video on in the background while doing dishes, or do what I did and briefly skim the comments for someone to fight with! AI is dumb, it’s not even named effectively and you’re dumb for using it and a sheeple for calling it AI in the first place!
      Fight me! ❤️

      • FaceDeer@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Joke’s on you, I have a dishwasher machine! Robots do my dishes for me too! It is you who is the dumb one, having to labor manually as you do!

        Ah, there we go. Thanks.

  • mogranja@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I want the stuff, the stuff is there. I take it. The stuff is still there, nothing was lost, nothing was stolen.

    • Celestus@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      You’re not stealing stuff, you’re stealing revenue. The missing revenue is what they care about. But they have plenty of that already, so they can get bent

      • corvus@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Stealing revenue it’s hypothetical, because it supposes that you were going to pay for the product if it wasn’t available pirated. And that is far from being certain.

        • Celestus@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          That is very true, but that doesn’t stop them from going after piracy to protect the revenue

      • leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Not really, it’s just free publicity.

        Unless their product is shit, of course, and no one would pay for it after trying or recommend it to others… in which case, fuck them, they deserve it for attempting to sell shit.

  • What’s the justification for not allowing me to make a copy? Those who decry piracy call it theft, but it’s not theft since they aren’t losing anything. Not a physical product they could run out of, nor a potential sale as has been shown time and time again; people who pirate a thing generally wouldn’t have purchased the thing anyway.

    • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I am pro-piracy and I actually think that’s clearly a worse question.

      Did you take something that was intended to be sold or only given with explicit permission without permission or payment? Yes? Piracy. To be clear this is completely separate from the ethical questions that surround that, but defining piracy is (generally. GENERALLY, for emphasis) not that difficult.

  • rolandtb303@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    if they put in DRM that makes the plugins 10x as big (looking at you, Acustica. I don’t even use their plugins because of that), or they make the legit version have some bullshit always-online “all-in-one” software (i.e Native Access) which in turn makes the software a bit of a faff to get working in Linux (to install legit libraries for legit kontakt, native access stores those libraries as .iso files and does some virtual drive fuckery a la DAMEONTools), then yes, if the pirated version is quicker to set up and run (and install libraries for), it is justified imo.

    Also i hate theaters and streaming services. I’d rather watch whatever movie I think is cool in the comfort of my PC rather than having to drive to the theater (if it’s even on there in the first place), or paying for 9000 streaming services now and only watch like a couple of things. The wait for a good webrip (even more so for a BluRay) is worth it.

    • xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      in journalism they teach you to only do headlines with a question if the answer is no, otherwise just make it say “piracy is justified”.

      obviously this guy is a musician and not a journalist, and as such, actually thinking about things he makes….
      (i like his other videos too)

      • stringere@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s what I was referring to. Thank you for elucidating it, though, for others that may not have known.

    • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Believe it or not, I’ve met people like this. I know a guy who was worried about showing a movie to our Meetup group.

      Not because he was afraid of getting caught. He thought it might be unethical.

  • Lvxferre [he/him]@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago
    1. It’s morally good when people access information, culture, and entertainment.
    2. It’s morally good when the author of a work gets rewarded by their work.

    Piracy is morally justified when 1 is a more pressing matter than 2. As such, it’s justified in situations like this:

    • If, in the absence of piracy, the pirate would still not pay for the goods - because #2 is set up to zero (the author of the work is not rewarded anyway).
    • If it’s impossible to obtain the goods without piracy. For example, abandonware.
    • If the author of the work would get breadcrumbs of the money used to access legally the goods, and the pirate compensates the author directly (e.g. donation).