[NikolaNovak]

"If I don't have to pay for it then their work was objectively unproductive. It's an inherent failure of market economics"

I feel I'm reading Deepak Chopra - individual words are fine and you'd swear sentence should make sense... But it doesn't, no matter how many times you read it.

Not paying for something makes it unproductive? And you don't feel there are easy trivial immediate counter-examples for your axiom with big-boy words?

[andrewzah]

I'm not sure what you've quoted, because that is -not- what I said.

People should be paid for their work. Pirating doesn't pay them for their work. Work includes art and media. I'm not sure how I can state this more simply.

I'm not sure why this is even a complicated topic. With literally everything else, if you want something, you need to pay to acquire it because it took time and resources to make. That doesn't go away just because the end product is digital.

[Zababa]

> With literally everything else, if you want something, you need to pay to acquire it because it took time and resources to make. That doesn't go away just because the end product is digital.

The thing is that making a copy of something digital is really really cheap compared to something physical. The difference between the cost of producing one copy of a software or music and a million is way lower than for a physical object.

[andrewzah]

I agree that it's not a great analogy. However, the fact that copying technically has a "zero" cost, doesn't mean that we can just ignore the time, money, and effort spent by the people making that media. It's not literal theft but it does hurt the artists/creators in the long run.

[NikolaNovak]

I quoted knz_. It may not show up for you because his is a dead comment now so it'll depend on your settings. Not sure why it looks I responded to you, feels we are on similar page.