• alcoholicorn [comrade/them, doe/deer]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s not theft, because it doesn’t deprive the original owner of anything.

    But if it did, theft from billionaire hollywood studio owners is cool and good.

    You’re not paying the wages of the hollywood workers, you’re just increasing the funds the studios have to break the worker’s strikes and further depress their conditions.

    • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s legally theft. You can try as much mental gymnastics as you want to try and convince yourself you’re not breaking the law, but you are.

      It’s probably the most victimless theft that there is, but it’s still theft.

      • YuccaMan [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        What’s legal is not necessarily what’s moral, and there’s nothing immoral about freely procuring an infinitely replicable digital product. If anything, it’s immoral to enclose upon them and charge rents for them. No better than landlords, the big streaming companies, save for the fact that entertainment isn’t vital for living.

        • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          There’s absolutely something immoral about stealing. If you don’t think there is then it just means your morals are out of whack.

          You think people renting out their property is immoral? Yeah nah, your opinion on this is wrong.

          • alcoholicorn [comrade/them, doe/deer]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You think people renting out their property is immoral?

            Correct. All wealth is the product of labor, therefore rent and profit are theft, and workers taking back a bit of the wealth stolen from them is good.

          • BelieveRevolt [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Landlords are parasites that prey on the vulnerable and produce nothing of value. Corporations who own and profit from ”intellectual property” are no different.

      • alcoholicorn [comrade/them, doe/deer]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m quite aware there’s some silly laws written by those same billionaire’s lobbies and passed by their politicians.

        Copying something is quite obviously not stealing from someone.

        But again, stealing back some of the wealth the billionaires have stolen from us is morally good. If you’re not stealing from them, you’re stealing from your family to support your family’s further deprivation.

        • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It absolutely is stealing. You’re taking something that is not yours, something that someone else owns and charges money for.

          Mental gymnastics.

          • YuccaMan [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            And did you at any point ask yourself why they own these things? Why Netflix the corporate entity owns media it did not produce while stiffing the people that did out of just compensation? Or how that information slightly complicates the otherwise simple nature of property and theft?

            The only mental gymnast here is you bud. The simple fact is, labor creates value, and Netflix has no part in that. I doubt they even put up any of their own capital in producing these shows.

            • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Why they own these things? Because they paid for it.

              How are Netflix stiffing people out of compensation? Netflix pays the rights holders for the right to stream the content.

              On your last part you could not be more wrong. Netflix spent over $6 billion in 2021 on original content. Content they created. They pay for the streaming rights to everything that’s on Netflix up front - in 2021 they paid $11 billion to the rights holders of the content in order to stream it on their platform.

              You’re trying to justify theft. You’re the one doing the mental gymnastics.

    • HughJanus
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s not theft, because it doesn’t deprive the original owner of anything.

      That’s not how theft works. It’s called intellectual property. You are depriving the creator of compensation for the work they have dedicated resources to producing.

      If it wasn’t, no one would ever develop any kind of software or scientific research or write a book or produce any kind of intangible work whatsoever.

      This is complete nonsense fabricated by entitled children and it is exhausting.

      theft from billionaire hollywood studio owners is cool and good.

      You can justify it however you want. That’s what any criminal does. It doesn’t make it not theft.

      • YuccaMan [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Not so. The people who actually produce media (actors, writers, production crew) rarely if ever see fair compensation or residuals for their work. The only people you’re stealing from are the people who already stole the value that the actual creators generated, i.e. the studio. And in my opinion, you can’t rob a thief anyway.

        This logic doesn’t hold with smaller and/or independent projects, which even the saltiest pirates acknowledge should be payed for in the usual manner.

        Edit: Your point about compensation doesn’t even have a completely factual basis. Numerous scientific and medical advancements throughout history have been produced without compensation, often because their creators intentionally declined to profit from them. Sir Banting is a favored example around here; he was one of the first to synthesize insulin, and he and his colleagues opted not to patent it so that it would be as widely available as possible.

        • HughJanus
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The people who actually produce media (actors, writers, production crew) rarely if ever see fair compensation or residuals for their work.

          And in your utopia there would be zero compensation because the project would never be started in the first place.

          The only people you’re stealing from are the people who already stole the value that the actual creators generated, i.e. the studio.

          What? How does a studio steal the value that they created…?

          This logic doesn’t hold with smaller and/or independent projects

          No one mentioned anything about “small projects”. Tell me which of these small projects are not allowed to be pirated?

          Your point about compensation doesn’t even have a completely factual basis. Numerous scientific and medical advancements throughout history have been produced without compensation

          Because they have fucking day jobs that allow them the freedom to do that. Day jobs where they’re paid to do the same kind of work professionally and are able to dedicate the time to develop the skills and experience necessary to develop these side projects…

      • BelieveRevolt [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        If it wasn’t, no one would ever develop any kind of software or scientific research or write a book or produce any kind of intangible work whatsoever.

        Open source software developers, fan translators, emulation developers, etc.: lol.

          • BelieveRevolt [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            They make things without getting compensated for it. Same goes for everyone whose hobbies are drawing, painting, making music or any creative endeavor. I’m sure you also have hobbies, are you paid to do them?

            • HughJanus
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              They make things without getting compensated for it.

              I just addressed this. They only have the time and skills to do make them because they have a paying job that allows them to do that. No job = no skills = no charity. This isn’t complicated.

        • HughJanus
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Who said anything about who owns the IP? Software developers get paid because people pay for their software. If no one paid for it, it would never be made. Why is this so hard to understand?