[cjmcqueen]

Hiding behind theories of consumer behavior is not an excuse for immoral actions. Open source was never meant to be the place where open theft and piracy should thrive. And, the Robinhood sentiment isn't really applicable here because you're stealing from creators. YouTube may be owned by a multi billion dollar corporation, but it does support and bootstrapped a vibrant creator community. The more time we spend stealing content that should be supported by ads or a paid subscription the less effective we make that economy. If we want to do good here, pay some of your favorite creators with a tip, or merch, or specifically sub to their channel. Or, even better, come up with ways creators get paid more. Subverting ads is a downward spiral for things to work better for consumers and creators.

[zlg_codes]

Ads are not an important part of society. They're a crowbar cooked up by companies to barge into your daily life, as if they deserve to be seen and heard just because they want your money!

We need to cut middlemen out of the problem. 'creators' and 'influencers' and shit should find ways to make money from their fans directly.

Patreon, Flattr, gittip, etc are ways to achieve this.

Companies have no more right to communication than the rest of us, and they don't deserve any social or legal protection for the time and attention they waste in society daily from their incessant marketing.

[globular-toast]

Last night I performed a private concert in my house with an entrance charge. You did not attend. Were you "stealing from creators"?

If you walk past a busker on the street without dropping a coin in the hat, are you "stealing from creators"?

In the former hypothetical, this is clearly absurd. You didn't ask for the concert, you didn't even attend, so of course you were not obliged to pay for it.

This would be like Netflix telling you you are "stealing from creators" by not watching their shows.

In the latter hypothetical, you did not ask for the performance but you heard it nonetheless. You may have even enjoyed it. The busker has costs that you did not meet like food, clothes and equipment costs. How could you not support that?

If Netflix follows the "private concert" model, YouTube very clearly follows the busker model. If it wasn't in public, most of these creators would be like me playing the concert in my home: nobody would attend. They need to be in public.

You can't be in public and force the public to pay.