-Why I Pirate- Is piracy justifiable?

[Euphoria14]

SecondWar said:

Euphoria14 said:

SecondWar said:

pezus said:

 

On the flip side of that, though, who actually loses something when I pirate a digital version of a game? The RIAA, MPAA, and others continue to spin piracy as theft, but we know that’s not true: I’m not taking my game from anyone. It’s not like Little Timmy arrives home to find out that he can’t play Lego Star Wars because Sebastian has stolen the grubby disc. If I wasn’t intending to buy a DVD in the first place — if I don’t have the money to buy the DVD, for example — what is the impact of me downloading an XviD rip? There isn’t one.

I really detest this part of any pro-piracy arguement, as they try to make out that they aren't actually commiting theft. Here is a (fictional) example why it still is theft: 

Mr Clucky has just opened a fried chicken restaurant where all the chicken with his secret herbs and spices. Across the street is one of Colonel Sanders successful restaurants that is part of his fried chicken restaurant chain. On trying his new competitor's chicken, Colonel Sanders is horrified to find that it tastes better than his own recipe. Desperate to maintain his restaurant's success, Colonel Sanders hacks into Mr Clucky's computer and downloads a copy of his secret chicken recipe. He does not delete Mr Clucky's own copy, telling himself he is not stealing as he has made another copy rather than taking Mr Clucky's own. When Colonel Sanders chain launches their new and imporved recipe with a massive marketing campaign, Mr Clucky's restaurant forced to close.

I know this probably not a great example, and I'm sure a fair number of people will pull me up on it, but despite making his own copy, Colonel Sanders has stolen from Mr Clucky as he has used Mr Clucky's propety without his consent. If you don't call that theft, then its industrial espionage, which is even worse.

There are issues I have with media companies with do push me to the brink of piracy (although I have never done it). I hate that the 'new' episodes of American Dad that I just watched on the BBC are actually 2 years old and the USA is already getting Season 7 whilst I'm only able to get Series 5. Also, in the last place I worked, I was told my a colleague that the store was forced to stop playing the radio in the stock-room as the music companies demaded they pay an (extremely excessive) fee for 'public broadcasting'. This was in spite of the fact it was in the stock-room and nobody on the store front could hear it. The colleague in question said as a result he pirates all his music now, which I can sympathises with as in cases like that the music companies really dont help themselves.

Colonel Sanders made a copy of something Mr. Clucky owned, I find that to be different from me buying a DVD, making a copy of it and then giving it out to people I know. Mr. Clucky didn't make his recipe publicly available, but in my case I made the DVD I owned publicly available.

If I can't make a copy because I don't own it then why should I have to pay for it?

If I take a picture of the Mona Lisa and have that photo enlarged to fit a big photo frame in my home, did I steal it? It is the same argument I brought up before. Was I stealing when I used to record the songs off the radio onto cassette tapes? They were made publicly available and I decided to grab some.

 

It isn't theft because nothing was actually stolen from anyone, but rather someone made copies of something they own and shared it with others at no profit to themselves.

Weren't you taught that sharing is caring?

I feel this is where the major sticking point is with piracy, because of the fundamental differences between hardware and software. I don't think anyone debates you own a CD or DVD, but what you don't own is the content that is stored on them. You've effectively bought a license to use to CD/DVD to access the content for your own use. Copying the content and disrupting it, is going against the license that you agreed to when you bought the CD/DVD.

I also feel if pirates were in the other position, they would feel differently. If they invested a huge amount of time and money into making something, only to find a guy down the street was making copies and giving them away they would be rather angry. 

In you 'sharing is caring' arguement, you might be sharing but you're also competing with somebody with their own creation, which is unfair in every business sense.

Well that settles my internal debate then. I will no longer pay for movies, music or games since I don't own what I bought. Gonna just keep on chugging along.

Now, does borrowing fall into this same category you described, because from the looks of it it should right? If I lend Dark Souls to 4 different people at work I robbed Namco and FROM Software of money. I costed movie studios money when I recorded movies off of HBO on VHS. I costed the music industry money when I would record music off of the radio. I costed them money my whole life and probably so did almost everyone here because I doubt nobody here ever borrowed anything from anyone without sending a small check to someone in order to prevent themselves from robbing them of a sale.

Bunch of thieves...

 

Point is, the way I look at it is that if I buy something, it is mine. I buy an album, so I should reserve the right to do what I want with the content on that disc since I paid to have what is on that disc. I hate this day and age where you don't own anything, even though the prices are absurdly high. If I only own the plastic but not the data then only charge me for the plastic.

 

You're not paying for the song but rather the right to listen to the song.

Fuck that shit. These are the same people who put their songs on Youtube for us to listen to at no cost while making money from the advertising.

 

Maybe it is more of a case of them getting with the times than giving a bogus reasons as to why we don't actually own anything we spend our hard earned money on. Even when free they can earn money. It is just a case of them wanting more.