Which is moraly (not legaly) worse? Secondhand _ Pirating _ Renting_Lending

[Onyxmeth]

ironman said:

Onyxmeth said:

You're still talking about the moral responsibility of the collective. That bears nothing on the moral responsibility of the individual. Collectively, used game buyers keep the cycle going. Individually, they don't contribute a damn thing.

Yes they do. The money they spend on the used games will (in most cases) go towards a new game. Buying a used game is just as moral as selling one.

There are also unseen benefits that emerged because of piracy existing in the bigger picture, but that doesn't mean an individual pirate gets off the hook.

Yes, but the damages outwiegh the benefits.

 

1. How do you figure? The money a person spends on used games will then go to them buying a new game? I don't see how that makes sense.

Also why do you consider any of this moraly obectional? I'm basing it on the argument that the publisher should see money, and depriving them of it is the objectional part. If you differ in your stance we might as well stop talking now.

2. Regarding the piracy, prove it. Prove the damages outweight the benefits, and also prove the used market is more beneficial than harmful. Publishers seem to think both are pretty bad, so if it's their interests we're protecting in this moral battle, we also have to abide by their stance on both issues.