Comment on Pluralistic: "If buying isn't owning, piracy isn't stealing"

• Wrewlf@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Did they consent to the free sex?

  source

  • SCB@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    No because the entire metaphor is built on the concept of prostitution

    source

    • zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Prostitutes can’t have a romantic life? This is such a bizarre metaphor, let’s see where it leads 🍿

      source

      • SCB@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Hey dude it’s called a metaphor. Sex is a fleeting service.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• psud@aussie.zone ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Piracy is also not at all like stealing services, just as it is unlike theft of real items.

  Not paying a prostitute because you have a sexual partner at home who meets your needs is closer, but also not the same

  source

  • SCB@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Except your literally performing the same service, which I paid by everyone but you. Game of Thrones is expensive. Subs pay for it.

    Fuck man I’m pro-piracy because I do it to, but it is absolutely stealing. Make peace with it.

    source

    • psud@aussie.zone ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Stealing is the wrong word for it though as software piracy does not deprive the owner of the thing copied.

      There are arguments that it is nett good even as it gets people into an author, singer, game company, while they cannot afford it and they may become a good customer for that author, singer, game company later in life

      This new problem where companies revoke your licence to content is the industry shooting itself in the foot so I don’t care about the ethics of it, if they don’t sell me a product for me to own like I own a paper book, I’ll take a copy without licence

      source

      • poopkins@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        How is the owner not deprived of your copy? Have you given it back to them? It’s an odd thing to mince over words like “theft” and “stealing.” If it’s the words that bother you, perhaps consider this: should it be permissible to consume a digital good without consent of the copyright holder?

        If the copyright holder wants more exposure, that is up to them to decide. It’s absolutely unreasonable to do so on their behalf and claim it’s somehow doing them a favor. With that logic, any form of theft can be legitimized.

        source