• Zoolander@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    9 months ago

    That’s both dishonest and factually untrue. If you’re ingesting the creation without paying for it, then you’ve stolen it from the artists because they didn’t create it for free (unless they explicitly have). The creator sees a difference because you wouldn’t have been able to ingest their creation without paying them for it.

    • pivot_root@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Theft requires you to deprive the original owner of their property.

      Creating a digital copy does not prevent the creator from accessing or selling their property. Potential income is not property; it was never in their possession to begin with.

      • Zoolander@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        You’re arguing a legal definition. I am not.

        I am arguing that people deserve to be paid for their work. If you’re not willing to pay them, you are not entitled to the fruits of their labor for free. Full stop.

        • pivot_root@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          It’s not just the legal definition. It’s the dictionary definition, as well.

          Piracy is illegal, unethical, a small loss in net profit, and a whole bunch of other things. It’s just not theft. If it really needs to be given a label that isn’t “piracy”, the closest one you’re going to find is “appropriation”:

          noun. the action of taking something for one’s own use, typically without the owner’s permission.

          • Zoolander@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            It is theft, by your own definition. By the dictionary definition that you just posted, you’re stealing (“the action or crime of stealing”) income from the creator, unless they’re explicitly giving that creation away for free.

              • Zoolander@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                How does that do anything other than prove my point?

                “without permission or legal right”

                • pivot_root@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  the action or offense of taking another person’s property without permission or legal right and without intending to return it; theft.

                  Piracy isn’t taking property without the intention to return it. The pirated media itself is property, but it’s being copied rather than stolen. The potential profits from selling said media to you is being taken, but that’s not tangible property capable of being stolen.

                  On the other hand, piracy is appropriation. It’s just doesn’t meet the criteria of theft/stealing.

                  • Zoolander@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    Now you’re just arguing semantics. Argue the point. Do people deserve to be paid for the work that they create and, if not, why are you entitled to view and consume the fruit of their labor without paying for it (with the exception of them explicitly granting that)?

    • Lemming6969@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      Don’t worry, you’re correct and these people are just uncomfortable to define this as theft (if you didn’t pay something to someone prior.). If you didn’t pay, it’s theft, and it doesn’t matter what background revenue sharing agreements exist.

      • pivot_root@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        Google’s example sentence is quite topical. Still: Until potential income is defined as property, its loss isn’t theft. Besides that, if someone wasn’t going to pay for a digital copy in the first place, it’s not exactly a loss of potential income.

      • Zoolander@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        I know. It’s painfully obvious that the people arguing against this are just dishonest. I’ve already stated several times that I have no issues with piracy. All I’m saying is that, if people are going to pirate, they should be clear that it is theft, they’re depriving the creator of income, they’re ok with that, and they’ll continue to do it. That’s it.

        • Sneezycat@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Ok, so when I decide not to pirate and not to buy I’m also stealing? Or do you think if I didn’t pirate something I would definitely buy it?

          I have pirated and later bought things I’ve enjoyed that I wouldn’t have bought otherwise, so I’d argue that’s better for the creators. But I guess I’m being dishonest 🤷🏻

          • Zoolander@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Did you watch it still?

            If you didn’t pirate and didn’t buy it and also didn’t watch it, then no it’s not stealing.

            If you did watch it, then it’s stealing.

            It’s not that hard of a concept. You’re not entitled to the fruits of someone’s labor for free unless they’re explicitly granting you that entitlement.

            So yeah… it’s being dishonest to pretend like piracy isn’t stealing.

            • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              If you did watch it, then it’s stealing.

              This is the hottest of takes and by the same logic I will claim your eyeballs are now violating me by the act of reading this.

              The issue that you seem to miss is that for someone to steal something, someone has to lose something.

              Here is an example:

              Sue has a dog, Jim walked up and took the dog. Sue does not have a dog anymore. <— This is stealing/theft ect.

              Sue has a dog, Jim walked up and used a device to make a perfect copy of the dog and then gave the copy away. Sue still has a dog. <— This is software piracy.

              • Sneezycat@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Yeah according to his logic you can just download and hoard all the stuff you want, because it’s not stealing until you actually watch it. Schrödinger’s pirate?