It is illegal and immoral. It steals the rightful intellectual property of directors and developers who are only trying to make a living. If you want to be a thief so badly, then rob a federal bank.

  • AbsolutelyNotABot@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    People who will pay as long as they get their money’s worth, who may also be open to supporting the creator directly

    The point is, isn’t the producer right to make the price? You can always not consume what they produce. This category is the most obnoxious; would you ever go to a restaurant and expect to decide the prices?

    It’s the very same argument for producers that willingly release their contently freely and let you support them, eventually. It’s their choice.

    Of the three you quoted preservation is the only one I find acceptable. If the producer no longer care to distribute their product, then they probably don’t care to what it happens to it either.

    I think It is illegal and immoral to sell consumers a license to use a product, under the guise of them owning it

    For me the main difference is that nobody is forcing you to accept the transaction. I could accept this kind of argument for drugs for example, where you either take it or die/have serious repercussions. But pirating a movie you would have very much lived without just because is easy to do so it’s particularly problematic.

    they are going to get paid regardless of whether you as an individual decide to purchase or pass on a product

    Except they aren’t. Or at least, of course they’re payed the same, at the moment. But in our economy prices are signals. If a market will appear smaller then it is because of piracy then after some timesfewer developers will be hired, and each of them will be payed less because you’re “falsifying” the signals. Or even worst, the producers will start to use alternative form of monetization. That’s one of the reason the modern web is based off ads or free-to-play games with microtransanctions are so damn common.

    IMO the people in the first camp probably aren’t interested in money if they have chosen not to purchase their media to begin with

    The people in the first category should also think about the allocation problem. Those products which they like to consume but not pay for, still had a cost of production. The problem is they want ti consume, without supporting production, and that’s not gonna work for a society.