[b2themax]

Piracy is completely unethical.

He argues that somehow piracy caused innovation in the music industry, and thus the piracy of hollywood will somehow usher in a new era of innovation in streaming video. In some respects its true that Napster brought about innovation in digital music... BUT IT HASN"T STOPPED PIRACY!

There is a ton of more streaming options today, which is great for lawful netizens, we do have a lot of great options. But that doesn't excuse pirates from ethical obligations.

You don't have a right to someone's property just because you think you should.

Maybe I should just take refuge in your fancy-house just because I think it would be morally just because you have a nicer house than I do.

Thats essentailly the argument pirates make, and it doesn't hold water.

[hobarrera]

> Piracy is completely unethical.

Yet, up to last year, HBO was saying it was good for business because it made even more people talk about it.

I wish they made up their mind if it's good or bad for business once and for all.

[fragmede]

> I should just take refuge in your fancy-house

To further your analogy, it costs me approximately $0 to make an exact copy of fancy-house, it travels over the internet to you, and what you do with your copy doesn't affect me in the slightest.

I am very willing to give you a copy of my fancy-house under such a scheme, and you are completely welcome to do with it whatever you want.

[b2themax]

You are living in this entitled fantasy world. How do you believe this doesn't effect film studios? Everyone who pirates a film is someone who could have been a paying customer. Instead they choose to break the law. An alternative option is to not watch the illegal films!

Either don't pirate, or pay for your media. People shouldn't steal.

Maybe they should be patient and wait until the films come into the public domain if they're too cheap to pay.

[lazylizard]

then maybe copyright should be limited to 5 yrs instead of life + 129 yrs.

[aric]

You're welcome to do that. That's assuming you have the power to press a key and duplicate data that comprises a home and materialize it for your use. I'll even throw in a housewarming gift basket and a helping hand.

The unethical people in these equations are the ones who try to bend the world to their whims of "intellectual" order. They see no problem with violence on human beings over literal duplication of information. Economically speaking, a lesser degree of unethical behavior surrounds only people who duplicate data who would have paid for said content. A minority of content spreads worldwide on that basis. Hundreds of millions of teenagers and adults getting online can barely afford an internet connection if even a personal computer. Meanwhile, the amount of content and producers exponentially increases. They are not "completely unethical" for taking part in fleeting, frivolous entertainment -- the vast amount of it they wouldn't deem worthy to purchase in place of other choices. Everyone's situation is different. Rarely in the human condition is something "completely unethical", especially in the context of data and non-violent actions. Streaming services like Spotify are a good start. They respect the nature of information more. They try to appeal to hearts and minds. That's healthy.

Then there are industries where net positives exist along with piracy. Growing the size of a user/fan base becomes an added dependency of future success. Industry sets adoption. Adoption sets industry. Piracy by individuals is tolerated or even internally respected, while only the piracy of moderate and large businesses is targeted. The world, for instance, was awash with Windows cracks and serials in the 90s and early 2000s, having a tremendous impact globally on people who couldn't afford it or who wouldn't buy it. In the absence of such piracy, such as by a hypothetical corporate-fascist state putting people to death or by magical DRM, Linux would be in millions of more households by now.

[b2themax]

> You're welcome to do that. That's assuming you have the power to press a key and duplicate data that comprises a home and materialize it for your use. I'll even throw in a housewarming gift basket and a helping hand.

Okay, I'll take you up on your offer. Can you please set up a server where I can download a disk image of your desktop computer? By one press of the button, I can have a copy of your "house"... no harm to you, right?

Let me just have every piece of data you own... just a harmless copy... just because I want and value it.

It's a lot different when it's your things people want versus other people's things.

[aric]

That's correct. Your duplicating a home wouldn't harm me. My magical house would be Free and open source. Let me know of any bugs if you'd be so kind. Catch and release if you have a heart. The corner spiders are friends and good workers. I'll set up a server. Prepare your robotic minions. Ping me in 15 years. :)

Personal desire for privacy is wholly separate from whether or not your duplicating a house harms me. It's baffling logic to suggest otherwise. But I'll play along. In this hypothetical, you value some data and I don't want you to have it. Therefore, our interests clash. Acknowledging reality on my end would mean attempting to safeguard the data from you. That means taking realistic measures to do the opposite of making it free or widely available for a price.

There's an intellectual world. There's a physical world. Ethics is not particular laws subjecting people at arbitrary points in time. Ethics is discussion of real-world damage and recourse. It's philosophy that must be perpetually debated before it swirls down a corporate drain along with any other semblance of "justice" flushed with it to churn out prisoners and chilling effects. Caring about reality starts with recognizing reality. Duplicating binary information is easy. Information can spread across the world in seconds. Some obstacles are effective at earning support and capital from information. Other obstacles are not effective. Security is generally weak. Some people are naturally curious and hungry. Some people suck. Most people are generally good. That's reality. People who have disposable incomes often want to encourage the producers they value -- with money, without friction. That's why crowdfunding exists.