what ‘level of piracy’ is morally or ethically acceptable to you?
If I could, I would download a car.
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
Ko-fi | Liberapay |
what ‘level of piracy’ is morally or ethically acceptable to you?
If I could, I would download a car.
Cars are bad for the environment, please download bicycles instead.
Good point ... also I don't have a driver's licence anyway.
You wouldn't download a driver's licence.
That depends. Is it going to get me arrested the first time they pull me over?
Setting legality aside, what 'level of piracy' is morally or ethically acceptable to you?
All levels. I think that human beings are morally and ethically obligated to do anything that causes a corporation to lose or miss out on profits. They exploit and disrespect our power as consumers by changing EULA after we purchase products, I see no reason not to rob these mfs blind.
If it's an indie game I'll pay for it after pirating, if I enjoy the game.
I hate opening this way, but, as an "artist," DL everything. Art deserves to be pushed away from profit motives and i hate hearing, "but your fave musicians wont get ur money!" Theyre not getting money off of record sales anyway, they hardly ever did. Ill put out what i make for free download. If ever ppl seem crazy enough to wanna donate, ill look into opening up those avenues, but its not like thats happening anytime soon. Way i see it, its not like i could stop if i wanted to. Why ask for money and limit how many ppl i can reach?
I'd say for myself it's a tit for tat situation.
If the company I hypothetically pirate from is a total prick, mistreats their employees, donates a part of the money they earned from my purchase to lobby to my government to reduce the rights of minorities, I won't give a single fuck. I may even just never touch their product out of spite.
Are they inoffensive and fairly neutral? I likely won't pirate if I have the means to buy it.
Are they basically ConcernedApe? I will follow them to the ends of the earth showering them with praise and riches. Never pirate and would actively shame those who do
Are they basically ConcernedApe?
Literally the main person in mind when I was writing that last sentence 😂😂 he can have my money.
Edit: I pirated stardew initially, then bought three copies over the years on different platforms, either for myself or as gifts for friends.
this. no need for a complex system to justify it to myself either.
only caveat is that its not really 'robbing'
Where's the "Rent is 60% of my monthly wage, so I can't afford a 120 euro game."
piracy | yes |
Simplified it a bit
I pirate be because I don't have money, that's why.
In a sense, not being able to afford it is itself a region lock on it.
Thank goodness LM can't see this because that would be the cue for a corporate bootlicker to say "yOu dOnt HavE to PlAY thEm tO sURviVe"
Do what you want 'cause a pirate is free
I pirate because I want free shit
Couldn't have phrased it better. Do people really care about ethics when pirating content ?
Rank 16: Pirating because I grew up with low access and got used to it.
Now I have enough money to buy things, but it's no fun. I like the challenge of finding something for free, it feels like cheating capitalism.
I pirate because I dont earn my wage in dollaridoos, and I believe information and culture is a human right that shoudln't have any impact on me being able to pay my bills.
If I can, and want, I'll pay. Other than that big corporations that boasts about record sales every year could cry some more about me downloading an .iso for all I care.
Here's a rough summary of my philosophy:
Intellectual property as it is typically defined and legally defended is a self-contradictory concept.
IP in an ideal world would protect creators from fraud, (others falsely claiming credit for their work.) And would ensure fair payment distribution to the artist and workers directly involved, (not allow giant multi-billion dollar corpos to control and profit off massive swaths of IP).
You always have the right to do with your copy of media, whatever you want. Remix, trade, critique, promote, copy, etc.
It is always preferable to pirate vs funding corpos.
Pay for products that respect you, don't pay to be abused or to help abuse others.
I always try to pay the artist and those actually involved directly.
As for the sound techs, producers, etc that work on a project, most of them are already receiving a salary/wages for their time. So I disagree with Louis that pirating media generally hurts those folks.
The artist usually has some conditional debt where the record label requires them to cover some portion of the production costs from sales before they start actually making money. This is frequently a very exploitative arrangement that favors the studio and label. (See points 4 & 5)
There is no perfect solution. If the artist is small enough, direct sales of merch and media is the best option. This is what I try to do as much as possible.
I think another point is that art is fundamentally not a commodity, or at least, shouldn't be treated as such. Capitalism corrupts everything it touches, art is no exception. Artists who are truly passionate about their craft will create no matter what, as evidenced by the far larger portion of "starving" artists in the world vs wealthy ones.
I hate that music, film, paintings, and such are now treated as portfolios of investments by billion dollar corpos and rich fat cats who don't give a shit about the purpose of art and just want to get rich.
Pay for products and services that respect you. Don't pay to support abusive and exploitative industries if you can avoid it. Support genuine artists. Everything will always be fuzzy, make your best call. Copying is not theft. Corpos are scum.
I pirate because I’m broke, and when I’m not broke I pirate because I want to test before buying, or because fuck this company in particular (like with Disco Elysium or anything EA)
If you’ve got the means to pay for media and the company or person that produced it isn’t awful, you should probably purchase it. But I don’t particularly care either way, do what you want
I wish to live in a society in which this question is a moot point. Creators should have the freedom to create without having to worry about the goodwill of their audience, or worse, marketing strategies. Fans should have the freedom to access art without having to worry about the well-being of the creator, or worse, suffering guilt. Anything that is not aimed at creating and maintaining this state of being is inhumane.
I think that a system where we should abstain from things that are basically free to reproduce (i.e. things you can pirate) is dumb. There are many movies that I probably wouldn't pay money to but that I've pirated. The companies that own the rights to the movie don't lose any sale they would have otherwise made but I get whatever enjoyment I get from watching the movie at least, so it's a net win.
When I pay may bills at the end of the month I also put some money towards paying for things that I've pirated that I like, usually with a focus on smaller creators. It doesn't really feel meaningful to pay for a marvel movie for example. It's not really a perfect system but neither is artificially limiting the access to digital media.
Warner Bros. is an example of a movie company that gives zero fucks to any of the artists producing their movies, not sure what good supporting them will do.
I refuse to pay for pirated content out of principal. It's bad enough that I'm infringing copyright (and boy do I!) but commercialized piracy rubs me the wrong way. I even prefer Bittorrent over Usenet and FOSS media software over commercial software. Yarr!
I do not know about the video but i can't agree with this table. Even if you don't buy it an artist work should be spread if you're not the one buying it by talking about it or just seeding you'll allow someone to support the author. This makes piracy look like some grey thing, IT IS NOT.
Support the artists and if you can't or don't want to, spread the word this is how it works.
When someone says piracy or "using an unauthorized copy of someone's work" it can be for many different reasons.
On the moral and ethical side (as I'm leaving out the legality aspect from the discussion) some of these situations may sit well with some people, some may not. The list of situations themselves are adapted from Louis's free-market viewpoint. He has articulated in the past that people that bring something of value should be awarded in kind, and spreading the word to drive sales justifies using work without paying to him is like paying a professional photographer in "exposure".
I can understand if you disagree with the premise of the chart because of the above, it's just the basis from which I formed it.
What's the significance of the colors? Greenish = "stealing", orange = "okay", yellow = "grey area"? Seems awfully negative, maybe invert the whole thing.
The colours have only partial relevance to whether it's more or less ethical in the context of piracy. The colours signify more what is better for that category specifically. Having no DRM is better than not, supporting a creator is better than not, having it availble to buy or rent is better than having it discontinued, as a few examples.
Green = Good for that category, Red = Bad, Yellow = Mixed, Grey = Not good nor bad.
Good for that category
According to whom? For example the premise of the last question is "I want free shit and don't care about the creator". So how is "not putting money forward" a negative? It's the core of the outcome I wanted.
Yeah I'm number 15
Don't be ashamed! This is a post on !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com after all.
I can't stand Rossman's videos; but I respect the hell out of his ideas, principles, and efforts to better the slices of technological life that he cares about.
I don't agree with everything he says but he does stick to his principles well.
he does stick to his principles well.
He's an open source advocate but made his grayjay app closed source.
He has also started paying for YouTube Premium again, despite making I believe two videos on why it's bad. Oddly enough, I noticed it in the video where he talks about his friend who repaired childhood photos of his.
The whole point of "ethical" piracy is ridiculous. It's old good corporate anti-piracy propaganda but rechewed with some progressive takes. "You wouldn't download an indie car", literally. If you need some justifications and excuses for piracy, than just don't pirate at all. The fact that i'm downloading some game from torrent because i've broken purchased DVD with it never makes me more ethical in any way than some other leecher on the same torrent who's never going to pay for it.
I go straight to the bottom of the barrel
Do it loudly and do it proudly! Well, not so loudly that the feds hear about it.
Amogus with a broken back
I am 12 to 15
The only time I see piracy as unethical is if you would have paid for it otherwise and it's a small creator who will actually notice the lesser revenue. This covers very, VERY few cases because the vast majority of the time if something is good enough to want to pirate it, it's popular enough that more than enough people paid for it to adequately compensate the creator.
Basically, are you hurting the creator's ability to make a living by pirating it? Giving them less money when they already have more than enough doesn't qualify.
Im glad your useing OpenDocument.
I can't really afford to pay for some things. I feel like pirating indie games is hurting indie creators by showing there's demand for pirating them, making it more likely indie games will be pirated.
So I only play indie games that were originally released free of charge to begin with.
For AAA games, I pirate freely.
For anything else, I pirate without much thought of the morals and ethics of it (that is some music (from the 60s-80s so I'm not hurting creators) and movies/tv that are oftentimes not keeping up to the standard expected and make their money at the cinemas anyways (and for the TV shows, they have already made more than enough, as I don't really follow anything newly released))
Depending on the situation, up to #13 for me. A caveat to that might be whether or not the creator has appropriately priced their product so as to justly compensate themselves without charging consumers excessively. While I had it in my Steam library already, Factorio deserves to be pirated for breaking with the standard practice of not raising game prices with inflation. Same with Sega's anti-consumer move to remove the Sonic ROMs from the Sega Genesis collection to boost sales of Sonic Origins.