Tried to read an e-book from the local library. No problem downloading it, but the file was encrypted, and only an Adobe app that does not run on Linux could decrypt it. I used Wine in Linux to run the Windows version of this app, and it worked right up to the point of actually decrypting the file. Couldn’t read the e-book I’d checked out. So I pirated the book.
I went to some trouble to download and install Wine and the Adobe software, and I resent that. Tried to do things the legal way. Could’ve saved myself much bother by pirating first and skipping the public library. I also deleted the Adobe garbage.
There is actually an adobe deacsm extension you can install in calibre on linux, in order to rip books in linux
Piracy has never been stealing.
When you steal something, the real issue is that the other person is deprived of some tangible item they used to have.
When you “pirate”, you’re merely violating a copyright. The government granted someone a monopoly on the expression of an idea, and you’re not respecting the government’s decision on that item’s exclusivity.
Sure but game companies need to get paid or they won’t make games. Right? Luckily there are many others who pay for games so you can pirate, but without them paying, there wouldn’t be a product you can pirate.
I just picked a game company as an example but of course you understand this.
And like. I’d be fine with that if the primary function in practice was to ensure the original creator gets financially compensated for their work and then they can pay for copyright controlled distribution services if that helps therm make sure they get paid but that is not why or how current law is used and I’m kinda losing that it even can be.
Right. Copyright is supposed to be for the good of the population. In order to encourage people to create things, they’re given a short monopoly on it after which it enters the public domain. The original copyright term was 14 years, I think.
The new setup is absurd. The public doesn’t benefit for more than a century, at which point the copyrighted item is probably of next to no value.
And, like you said, the artist rarely benefits. Writers are probably the ones who come the closest to benefitting. They only have to pay their agent a cut, their publisher, then, finally Amazon. With advances, etc. you have to wonder how much they get paid for each additional book sold. Musicians basically don’t make anything anymore, with the bullshit that Spotify (partially owned by the record companies) does. And then movies, TV, and other video stuff, the amount that creators get is massively watered down, and that’s after the “Hollywood accounting” makes profits from even successful things disappear.
I really don’t respect copyright anymore because it doesn’t benefit me (a member of the public) nor does it benefit the artist. It’s just a tool to hand money to certain entertainment conglomerates.
Exactly. It’s like jury nullification, but for copy rights. The government serves us not visa versa.
Audible pulled the same shit to me when i was in the middle of reading How to Hide an Empire. only half way through, suddenly “no longer available”, yet no credit refunded to my account. Fuck you Jeffery
That’s why I created local backups of my Audible library.
it’s there, its free, just take it and enjoy it
I’m gonna be the grumpy one and point out it’s “eat your cake and have it too”. That was the original version. It’s just that people are dumb and couldn’t understand that it’s supposed to be a paradox, so they started saying it backwards
That actually makes a lot more sense
Thanks Mr. Kaczynski!
Fuck off
Ironically based and piracy pilled
I cannot stand piracy, but my computer recently escaped its containment and started downloading all these movies and TV shows that I like to watch. Does anyone know how to stop this behavior? So far I’ve tried nothing
Tell it to download things you don’t like, too! That’s the best way to stop it.
It’s interesting how we jumped from owning physical media to “buying” permission to stream the file through the cloud.
Is there no service for people who are willing to pay for a downloadable, DRM-free copy of the file? It might be a bit niche, but it could at least make more than the $0 they make on each pirated copy.
GOG if you want to buy DRM-free games. Hoping to find a movie version of the site, I want digital copies of “Them!”, “Patlabor”, and so on.
Yeah Steam has some DRM-free games too. It’s interesting how this is an option for other media, but not movies (AFAIK)
There are a few authors and musicians who do things like that, selling things DRM-free on their own site. But, the US “content” industry is a handful of mega companies who are doing everything possible to maximize copyright so they can lock up and control as much stuff as possible.
Yeah I’ve bought some music like that before. I’ve also bought vinyl records that would include a small paper with a download code on it, which is cool.
If they could kick in your door and take away your DVDs, they would. Fuck em, pirate away.
If there is DRM, you’re only renting it. You may be renting it until further notice for a one-off payment, but your lease could be unilaterally revoked at any time. The supplier framing your lease as a purchase is at the very least being misleading.
The items are sold online. It is not misleading because it’s actually fraud.
We need to start regulating words like “buy” and “sell.” These words should only be usable in advertising if they refer to permanent sale that the seller cannot later revoke. Anything else should be required to be labeled “renting.”
It’s never been stealing, it’s infringement of copyright, which aught to carry much less of a penalty since the original owner was not deprived of their property.
But we live in hell, so capitalism literally bankrupts families when they film their kid dancing to music that was playing on a public broadcast on FM radio.
The record industry has always claimed that every pirated album is a lost sale, but that is t really true. Studies that have been commissioned by the record biz itself have shown that the biggest music PURCHASERS, are also big Pirates as well. These are people who spend every last cent on music, and still need more.
I generally use pirating to audition artists and albums I’m curious about. If I like them, I’ll buy their CDs, because I want the actual item, and I want to support the artist. But I can’t afford to buy random music just to see if I like it enough to financially support it.
Pirating is just the modern version of the radio.
Piracy isn’t stealing anyway
They call it stealing because the real legal term is unlawful copying or reproducing without copyright permits, and that sounds closer to a misdemeanor.
If we claim someone has stolen thousands of songs causing millions of dolars in damages it does look like a felony, and that is the way they’ve chosen to scare us.
If we claim someone has stolen thousands of songs causing millions of dolars in damages
An even funnier premise in the streaming era, where artists get paid like $0.005 per stream. You’d have to rack up 20,000 plays across these “stolen” songs before it “costs” the artist $100
I feel the same way about people applying terms like “theft” to events of intellectual property misuse like copying another artist’s art style, reusing another comedian’s jokes, etc. Those things are problems of their own, but should not be called “theft”.
when people do it, it’s interpretation - it’s only theft if they’re portraying themselves as the original artist, trying to leverage someone else’s work for profit.
now, when machines do the same thing, I think that very much is theft and should be illegal.
Gatekeeping technology is a personal irritation of mine.
The famicom and capacitor electrolytes should not belong to individual companies, they belong to all of humanity.
Not that I agree with the following, but I feel like many say piracy is theft because one is “stealing” potential income, not stealing the material itself. I vaguely remember someone on YouTube even said using Adblock is akin to piracy, as one is watching content without paying for it (and the assumption is one should pay)
The baristas watching me steal the coffee i just paid $8 for because I didn’t tip 18% when prompted
/jk
Honest question, if the movie reappears in the catalog on Google does the “ownership” return to the customer? My money is on no they would have to repurchase
Only if it’s exactly the same version. They’ll say you only have a license for that specific cut, and in the version now online there is one additional second of material so the license didn’t count.
Of cause it costs extra for the version with Gandalf’s Big Naturals!
We changed a black pixel in the intro credits by 1 hex value, that will be $69.99.
Piracy isn’t stealing, period.
It was totally ok to pirate movies before this practice ever took place. Information had always wanted to be free.
Yes and no. People so have to make a living. They are not doing this out of the kindness of their hearts. But at the same time fuck the corporations.
I made the same comment 5h ago https://beehaw.org/comment/6121936 Dafuq brah
I pirated it
Based
genius
It’s definitely stealing. I just happen to consider it morally acceptable stealing from these fuckwits.
Stealing means taking something from someone that won’t have that thing anymore.
Piracy is just duplicating. No stealing involved.
Can you post a source where you are getting that definition? Information can be stolen. Companies are stealing our data all the time.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/steal
The main qualifier is taking something without permission.
Nothing was taken.
It should say rent instead of buy and give the expiration date corresponding to the date on which the license term ends.
“Rent. Unlimited viewing until January 1, 2027.”
Yes that is the thing it was not conveyed to people that way.
This should be legally mandated labeling.
I think people should be paid for their work. I was happy to pay for music and movies and games. But I am not going to pay for something just to have it ripped away at a moments notice just because of corporate greed.
Additionally, I fully understand why someone would pirate when the thing they want isn’t available to them to purchase, or is out of their price range.
Also, what makes you think a purchase benefits the creator? And if it doesn’t, what is the moral case for purchasing?
What makes you think creatives don’t benefit? I think it depends on what it is and who publishes the thing. Lots of Indie game developers do benefit from purchases of their games. There are entities that tend to benefit more (publishers, store fronts, etc), but that doesn’t mean that the people who made the game don’t benefit.
It’s the same with music. Labels definitely benefit more. Streaming services benefit more. But at the same time that doesn’t mean the artist who made the music doesn’t benefit.
Sure, they may not get as good a deal as I would like, but the people who make movies don’t work for free.
I don’t buy any of this stuff, if I can’t find it on a current streaming service that I pay for then I’m pirating it.
