piracty always a sin

[josegarc]

is piracy always a sin how about if the programs or games are old and are not distributed yet so you can not buy the original

can i download old movies and games ? is ethically correct ?

 

[AlexB23]

is piracy always a sin how about if the programs or games are old and are not distributed yet so you can not buy the original

can i download old movies and games ? is ethically correct ?

Well, if the games are no longer distributed, preservationists keep the game files so the video games do not get lost to history, so this may not be a sin. However, if you pirate new games (say 10-20 years old or less) that are available on modern consoles or computers, then that would be a sin, unless you happen to own a physical copy of the game that you bought. Not a gamer her, but for me, I do not want to put my banking or card info online, so I convert music off of YouTube, in medium quality format. It is an ethical gray area. I do donate to help keep the electricity and heating on for veterans and folks who are poor though.

 

[Whyayeman]

As somebody who benefits from copyright laws I am less concerned with the idea of pirating as sinful, more that it is criminal.

Don't steal other people's property!

 

[partinobodycular]

I do not want to put my banking or card info online, so I convert music off of YouTube,

Just so you know, anytime a video with music is posted to Youtube! an algorithm scans its database to make sure that the copyright owner hasn't flagged it, and every major music studio has a list of songs that they don't want posted. If a song is on that list of flagged music it ain't getting posted on Youtube! You just can't sneak songs past Youtube's algorithm. So if it's a popular song, and it's on Youtube! it's because the copyright owner is perfectly fine with you downloading it. Youtube's copyright enforcer is very effective.

 

[Whyayeman]

re on topic copystuff is a tangled mess of millions of laws worldwide and with
various consequences , disputed consequences, disputed validity,
all in the flesh. i.e. worldly disputes, carnal reasons, fleshly concerns?

Or, you know, stealing from my pay-packet.

Apparent conflict with various interests;

Really stealing from real people. The law may be complicated, but in essence it is simple enough. Pirating copyright material is stealing - a crime as real as burglary.

 

[partinobodycular]

As somebody who benefits from copyright laws I am less concerned with the idea of pirating as sinful, more that it is criminal.

Don't steal other people's property!

To me this mindset is completely outdated, like slavery and women as chattel. But I assume that it'll be gone soon enough, when we don't need you anymore. When AI is better at doing whatever it is that you find so indispensable about what you do.

Society shouldn't be about pitting what one person has against what another person wants. Because then it often comes down to what you're willing to do to protect what you have, versus what another person is willing to do to take it. Doesn't sound like an idyllic world to me.

 

[Whyayeman]

To me this mindset is completely outdated, like slavery and women as chattel. But I assume that it'll be gone soon enough, when we don't need you anymore. When AI is better at doing whatever it is that you find so indispensable about what you do.

Society shouldn't be about pitting what one person has against what another person wants. Because then it often comes down to what you're willing to do to protect what you have, versus what another person is willing to do to take it. Doesn't sound like an idyllic world to me.

So authors, artists and composers should get nothing for their publications? It may be a mindset to you, but to me it is income.

It is not getting paid for your work that is slavery.

 

[partinobodycular]

So authors, artists and composers should get nothing for their publications? It may be a mindset to you, but to me it is income.

It's an understandable system in primitive times, just as slavery was, but it's definitely not ideal. And as I say AI will render it moot in the not too distant future. What system do you suggest that we employ when the author, the artist, and the composer are usurped by a machine?

That's a serious question. What are you gonna do? You... the inferior artisan, will have no value.

And as an atheist, what makes your right to sell what you create superior to my right to take what you create... nothing that I'm aware of, my right is just as justifiable as your right.

So what makes your right superior to mine?

 

[Paulos23]

It's an understandable system in primitive times, just as slavery was, but it's definitely not ideal. And as I say AI will render it moot in the not too distant future. What system do you suggest that we employ when the author, the artist, and the composer are usurped by a machine?

That's a serious question. What are you gonna do? You... the inferior artisan, will have no value.

And as an atheist, what makes your right to sell what you create superior to my right to take what you create... nothing that I'm aware of, my right is just as justifiable as your right.

So what makes your right superior to mine?

Ethics, fairness. The desire to have a system that allows continual exchange of items of value.

You assume everything comes from your God, but that is not the case. Civilizations and ethics come from people trying to live together over time.

Otherwise, we would be reduced to roving bands of robbers and warlords.

In the case of the artisan, whose value has none, they may stop creating or selling to people who prefer AI. Same with the game designer, they may just stop creating if their game is going to be stolen.

You assume there is nothing to prevent things from being stolen, but that is why there are laws.

 

[zippy2006]

I convert music off of YouTube, in medium quality format. It is an ethical gray area.

How do you figure that this is an "ethically gray area"? Pirating music is the same as pirating video games. It is stealing. It is criminal. It is a sin.

(Partino's claim about the YouTube algorithm commits the fallacy of thinking that uploading to YouTube involves permission to download, which is clearly false. Her other posts contain similar problems.)

 

[zippy2006]

To me this mindset is completely outdated, like slavery and women as chattel.

Let me get this straight… you just compared people who oppose theft to slave owners?



(You've somehow managed to bring the internet to a new low.)

 

[Whyayeman]

It's an understandable system in primitive times, just as slavery was, but it's definitely not ideal. And as I say AI will render it moot in the not too distant future. What system do you suggest that we employ when the author, the artist, and the composer are usurped by a machine?

That's a serious question. What are you gonna do? You... the inferior artisan, will have no value.

Well, the market has always determined the value of creative works - music, literature, the arts in general. If people want to buy material generated by AI - so what? But if it has a price and it is ripped off it is still stealing.

And as an atheist, what makes your right to sell what you create superior to my right to take what you create... nothing that I'm aware of, my right is just as justifiable as your right.

So what makes your right superior to mine?

Perhaps this principle could be tested on a trip to a supermarket. Fill up the trolley and just walk out.

 

[partinobodycular]

Perhaps this principle could be tested on a trip to a supermarket. Fill up the trolley and just walk out.

So your entire argument is that might makes right. To which I agree, there is absolutely nothing beyond might, that makes your right to sell something superior to my right to take it.

That's your entire argument. That's what your foundation for all civilization is based on... might makes right.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that does seem to be what you're saying.

You do see how that isn't an ideal basis for a society... right?

 

[partinobodycular]

Let me get this straight… you just compared people who oppose theft to slave owners?

Ah, but you missed something, both are invoking the premise that might makes right. In which case they're very much the same.

 

[partinobodycular]

You assume everything comes from your God,

What gave you that idea?

Ethics, fairness. The desire to have a system that allows continual exchange of items of value.

So you're invoking a system of consensus, in which majority rules. Again, might makes right.

Is this truly the best that you people can do?

Otherwise, we would be reduced to roving bands of robbers and warlords.

Ah, that's the assumption, that given the freedom to follow their lesser angels, people will inevitably do so.

 

[Paulos23]

What gave you that idea?

Because you said:
And as an atheist, what makes your right to sell what you create superior to my right to take what you create... nothing that I'm aware of, my right is just as justifiable as your right.

Why would you say that unless you believe your God is better to follow?

So you're invoking a system of consensus, in which majority rules. Again, might makes right.

Is this truly the best that you people can do?

It is what has evolved with human societies. Cooperation is better than brute force in the long run.

Ah, that's the assumption, that given the freedom to follow their lesser angels, people will inevitably do so.

Not always. When they are young and inexperienced, they can follow their lesser angels. But not all do. And once they learn that the shop they kept stealing from closes, or they get caught, they learn.

You have a low opinion of the human race.

 

[partinobodycular]

It is what has evolved with human societies. Cooperation is better than brute force in the long run.

I wholeheartedly agree. People want to be good. And if given the chance they'd much rather give something to someone else, than to steal something for themselves. I mean which would you prefer, to steal something that you want, or to give somebody else something that they want?

I'm guessing that you'd rather give. Which is why piracy hasn't killed the music industry, or the movie industry, or the book industry. It's why there are threads like this one, because people don't like taking things that they don't feel like they've earned.

You have a low opinion of the human race.

If anything, I'm far too optimistic about the human race, because I think that left to their own devices, people will choose to be good. And that if you gave them the option of paying for something, or getting it for nothing, enough of them would choose to pay... even above and beyond fair value... to make up for those who would choose not to pay.

So I'm of the opinion that we need a system in which people are free to pay what their conscience tells them that they should pay. And if their conscience tells them to pay nothing, then let them pay nothing. Think of it like tipping. People don't have to tip, yet they do, and those who feel so inclined may even consider it an honor to tip more, simply to make up for those who don't.

Such a system wouldn't be a case of might makes right, but rather a system in which people's consciences make right. But hey, if you'd prefer to believe that people would simply abuse the system, and the lesser angels would win out, I can't really argue with that. But still, I think that I'd prefer it over a system that says pay up or else.

 

[Whyayeman]

So your entire argument is that might makes right. To which I agree, there is absolutely nothing beyond might, that makes your right to sell something superior to my right to take it.

That's your entire argument. That's what your foundation for all civilization is based on... might makes right.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that does seem to be what you're saying.

You do see how that isn't an ideal basis for a society... right?

Not at all. That is, apparently, your position.

I am for the proper application of law, while you seem to think stealing is OK.

 

[Nithavela]

My opinion: if you can, support any works you enjoy. That's the best way of ensuring that they continue for a while longer until they are gobbled up by big entertainment and turned into trash by comittee.

There is plenty of free entertainment available. Movies, books, video games and music can often be had for free or a very modest fee at public libraries. Those libraries are supported by your taxes and artists benefit from them.

Often, old movies and games can no longer be had for a reasonable price. An example would be old video games from Nintendo. Nintendo has stopped distributing a lot of their classic games as downloadable content and they can only be bought on the secondary market for huge markups (as well as the problem of finding a working console). In that case, you're not stealing from anyone by downloading them game and emulating the console (though obviously it's still illegal unless you own a physical copy of the game). An alternative would be to watch streamers play the game you enjoy. That's what I did when my PC couldn't support games I was interested in. For movies, I'd say that as soon as they run in free tv, I wouldn't feel too bad about watching them on a streaming site (personally I've stopped watching movies years ago).

 

[Nithavela]

Perhaps this principle could be tested on a trip to a supermarket. Fill up the trolley and just walk out.

I hear that this works quite well in many US cities.