Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

If you can see this message, the SSL certificate expiration has been fixed.
Become a Patron!

/g/ - Technology


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 34 KB, 504x350, Piracynottheft.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71745339 No.71745339 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe] [rbt]

You can't steal 0s and 1s.

Piracy is an act of robbery or criminal violence by ship or boat-borne attackers upon another ship or a coastal area, typically with the goal of stealing cargo and other valuable items or properties.

Also pic related - copying is not theft.

>> No.71745348

You're kind of preaching to the choir here, bud.

>> No.71745376
File: 71 KB, 800x454, kfrBX.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71745376

>>71745339

>> No.71745412

>>71745339
>You can't steal 0s and 1s.
Well, yes you can. It's just more involved than copying. Either you'd have to steal the physical media that the bits are on, or you'd copy it and then erase the original.

>> No.71745467
File: 35 KB, 400x400, 5845ca511046ab543d25238a.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71745467

Killing is not murder, you simply remove atoms and molecules.

>> No.71745493

>>71745467
based murderbro

>> No.71745502
File: 20 KB, 398x387, 48a.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71745502

>>71745467
Stealing is not theft, you simply bend strings / move photons.

>> No.71745525

>>71745467
As a person's consciousness cannot currently be replicated killing is indeed murder and you are an idiot.

>> No.71745559

>>71745339
>rrrrreeeeeeeeeee stop saying piracyyyyy
Stop trying to shit on old internet culture, dumb zoomer.

>> No.71745560

>>71745525
I'm pretty sure it would still be murder even if perfect clone was possible.

>> No.71745566

>>71745339
Add a 1 followed by a fuckton of 0s to my bank account.

>> No.71745575

When you think about that proprietary software as money, which it essentially is, to the person selling the software, it becomes theft.

This little retarded comic is more convenient though.

>> No.71745594

>>71745339
>You can't steal 0s and 1s.

i swear chief, what i was doing is just atoms clashing together.

it's piracy and theft btw, and i don't care i will steal shit

>> No.71745614

>>71745575
Is it theft to cocacola if I decided to have water instead of soda for lunch?

>> No.71745624
File: 14 KB, 395x362, 719oCSBQ4oL._UX395_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71745624

>>71745339
I am actually a pirate and I can tell you from personal experience from years at sea that we do actually steal 1s on a regular basis, and occasionally even 0s, so no, OP, you don't know what you're on about, sage

>> No.71745644

>>71745467
And how about younger atom?

>> No.71745666
File: 79 KB, 728x635, imgbin-police-officer-happy-policeman-stock-photography-undercover-operation-police-dog-me29iFLqPZt7LP4a6qmv5rpgj.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71745666

>>71745339
Copyright infringement is still a crime.
So why don't you take a seat.

>> No.71745674

piracy isn't theft, it's copyright infringement. its still a crime and potentially ethically questionable. it does beg the question why we still have copyright in its current form when the entire purpose of copyright is to protect something from being copied by an unauthorized third party and due to the nature of digital information
there is nothing that can prevent you from doing that

a hundred years ago making a copy of a book or painting took effort. you had to go out of your way to do it, and at significant expense. now its a two second thing.

>> No.71745705

>>71745666
>So why don't you take a seat.
Because I live in Russia? I'm already sitting on a bottle.

>> No.71745721
File: 9 KB, 275x183, you asked for this.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71745721

>>71745339
Hmmm, that is an interesting argument.

Well I suppose we shouldn't have left the public acquire access to those 0s and 1s in the first place. Good thing we have a shiny new rebrand for the age old terminal paradigm.

Start up the cloud service, Timmy!

>> No.71745730

enough of my time and privacy has been violated that the value of the software i am 'stealing' is equivocable to the time and data they have wasted and collected of mine. I'll mail an invoice to billable sales if you want.

>> No.71745756

>>71745705
I'm pretty sure in Russia being gay is illegal too.
So you'll have to take a veeery long sit down. In one of our Chechenski Gay Gulags™.

>> No.71745853

>>71745566
Money doesn't exist anymore. You are right,

>> No.71745888

>>71745756
Not sure if I got you right.

>> No.71745904

It's not except in corporate slave shitholes.

>> No.71745919

>>71745339
>theft of income is not theft

>> No.71745922

>>71745339
piracy IS theft. But unauthorized copying isn't piracy. Piracy would mean physically stealing data while killing and raping people.

>> No.71745943

>>71745919
>competition is theft
>copyright is good
Hahahaha, kys you fucking Hitler.

>> No.71745950

>>71745705
>I'm already sitting on a bottle.

one guy one jar. videoformat

>> No.71745974

>>71745339
Possession is a myth as everything, including ourselves and our efforts are a part of this planet

>> No.71745988

>>71745339
I agree wholeheartedly as an owner of a chinese factory,

>> No.71746020
File: 15 KB, 650x365, stadia exclusives incomming.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71746020

>>71745339
I smell poorfag tears.

>> No.71746131

>>71745560
unless what we did was to clone but not murder the original. then we let the original be and only steal the copy.
this would be a more correct analogy to piracy.
you dont even take the original and leave a copy that might be imperfect with the owner. you take the copy and leave the original intact
>>71745525
if we clone and also kill the original. if we just clone and kill no one then its not

>> No.71746202

>>71745624
But I thought you stole pieces of eight

>> No.71746229

>>71745575
you can forbid persons from doing anything that has no victim and them be able to claim a person a victim becasue the other person dont need to relly on the only person allowed to do this thing anyway and claim its a crime when in reality if you had not forbid this thing there would never be a victim anyway.

>> No.71746290

>>71745721
lets see if i get this. you want us to consider piracy to be theft just because the solution to piracy makes the services worse, practical reasons not because it atualy is theft?

one thing we should agree. if copyright laws did not existed software would always come bundled with the hardware as it was back in the past. remember unix was created with the intention of running on any hardware. back on software was hardlocked.
copyright gave the company the trust they need to make their software run on any pc instead of just the hardware they make it for the software.

>> No.71746434

>>71746202
0
1
10
11
100
101
110
111
1000
simple

>> No.71747630

Piracy is indeed theft and if you have not come to this conclusion you are either being intellectually dihonest with yourself, or you are an idiot. Robbing someone of the opportunity to make money on a wide scale is really no different than just taking money directly out of someone's pockets, as you have to assume that at least some percentage of the people who copied the original good would have bought it had the option to pirate it not been there. Now, some people will make the argument "but I actually buy some of the things I pirate!", but this is, of course, complete bullshit. Do you really think you are in the majority of pirates when you say something like this? Do you buy a majority of things you pirate? I really doubt it. The truth of the matter is that when you pirate something; someone, somewhere loses. You may be able to justify this to yourself by saying that Hollywood is ridiculously rich and it's not a big deal (true), or that most movies and media are shitty and paying for things that you are unsure of is just pushing the risk onto the consumer (also true), or even that there will always be enough shmucks to purchase some overpriced HD4k ultra directors cut for 100 bucks, and that it is essentially those retards keeping the industry alive (also true). But note that all of those arguments are justifications, and while they may even be good justifications, they don't change the fact that at the end of the day, you have stolen something.

>> No.71747641

>>71745376
/thread

>> No.71747669
File: 18 KB, 400x400, 3800887.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71747669

>>71745339
fuck jews

>> No.71747672

It's not about that OP. It's about the objective moral truth that stealing is wrong

>Ten commandments
>What Jesus said

>> No.71747680

>>71747669
MODS MODS MODS
REMOVE THE RACIST
NOT TECHNOLOGY

>> No.71747688
File: 61 KB, 640x640, Abolish.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71747688

Reminder that private property is theft.

>> No.71747789

A good example of how 'just copying' something is in fact theft is when governments print more money to cover their expenditures. When governments do this, they inject more money into the economy, and in turn, reduce the purchasing power of the rest of the currency, essentially a tax on everyone who holds money. But... surely that isn't theft right? I mean, they're just making a copy, right?

>> No.71748230
File: 15 KB, 400x240, 1559443938544.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71748230

>>71747789
>anime pic inflation
lol nice

>> No.71748307

it is stealing if you would have bought it if the opportunity to pirate wasn't there. Because you are retroactively taking money from the creator's account and putting it in your own bank account

>> No.71748329

>>71745339
Taxation is not theft.

Taxation is an act of being provided one or many services in exchange for your obliged monetary donations to the state. With theft there is no provided service thus they're different.

>> No.71748337

>>71745339
You wouldn't make a copy of a car

>> No.71748378

>>71748307
I would just learn to use something else that's free instead. There's no way in hell I'm paying a thousand dollars for something like Sibelius if I'm not making money off it.

>> No.71748472

>>71745575
So the seller has unlimited money?

>> No.71748984

>>71745339
Piracy is a crime not because you copy stuff but because you expose the creator to not earn money that someone would spend on his product.

>> No.71749027

>>71745339
Where's the g2a version?

>> No.71749301

>>71748337
>You wouldn't make a copy of a car

I totally would, to be honest.

>> No.71749790

>>71748984
If you cant monitize your product without making the govt. threaten people then your business model must be bad.
Copyright/anti-sharing laws are a form of protectionalism which isnt compatible with the free market.

Companies should have to adapt to new technologies, and if they cant... well it's their own fault.

>inb4 hurr ancap durr roads
RMS has indirectly stated the same thing. Its funny you shills like to call freetards commies when it's a philosphy that respects private property.

>> No.71749872

>>71748307
So it's not a crime if I never would have brought it? Impossible to prove in court, lmao.

>> No.71749935

>>71747789
Taxation is theft and inflation is a hidden tax.
>Colonel Dick Taylor When Lincoln asked if the people of America would accept the notes Taylor said. "The people or anyone else will not have any choice in the matter, if you make them full legal tender. They will have the full sanction of the government and be just as good as any money; as Congress is given that express right by the Constitution."

>> No.71750000

>>71745467
/thread

>> No.71750009

>>71745339
>stealing potential revenue is not stealing

>> No.71750103

>>71749935
>>71747789
>>71750009
Infact, you have pointed out the problem of artificially giving value to something that can be copied for free.
You cant make people accept that it has any value without using violence. Information, just like fiat cant be considered capital.

>> No.71750123

>>71750009
Keyword: potential.

>> No.71750145

>>71745339
I'll tell you what. You just keep preaching those ideas. Make yourself more visible though. Instead of using your technology to hide yourself as you smile your smarmy smile and think "I got away with it again". Why dont you go all out to get caught doing it and try to convince a judge of your arguments. You could change history

>> No.71750164

>>71750009
Profit is theft.

>> No.71750218

so what is a good site where i don't need a faggy invite?

>> No.71750252

>>71747630
Have you faggots considered not overpricing your crappy products? People are less likely to pirate stuff if it's cheap and readily available. Make aquisition of your software a one time purchase of $10 instead of yearly subscriptions of $500, and maybe you'll have less piracy problems, but you faggots are too dense to do that.

>> No.71750295

>>71750218
fagsville

>> No.71750313

>>71750145
Even if a judge would agree with him, the law clearly does not. A Judge is only supposed to interpret the law.

OP is doing what he can. Advocate, raise awareness and create dialogue so that the law may be changed someday.
The only other approach is violent insurrection which desu sounds just as hard.

>> No.71750342

>>71747630
I haven't made any of those arguments, friend. I don't think anyone ITT has either.

Keep the strawman going though. Maybe you can delude some normalfriends.

>> No.71750350

>>71750252
Why should someone make their product cheaper? If you cant afford it do without, or use something you can afford. The thing about you is that you are either some unemployable dropout who thinks the world owes you a living or else you are simply a brokeass thief that hasnt got the balls to get a job or do anything to make you more money than your next hit on the bong

>> No.71750365

>>71750145
He’s right though it’s not theft. That’s not to say it isn’t illegal but it’s not theft; copyright infringement at worst.
Get your terminology right.

>> No.71750391
File: 1.18 MB, 957x1300, nignog.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71750391

>>71745339
>you can't steal atoms xDDD
Cluck cluck, cuck. That's the sound of a nigger stealing your Macbook.

>> No.71750401

>>71750350
>Not wanting to pay more of your hard earned money than what you're getting is actually worth is a bad thing.
Why are IP producers such retards?

>> No.71750420

Why do niggers always start threads like this?

>> No.71750438

>>71750420
You misspelled commies. Niggers just don't have any regard for other's private property, but the commies are the ones who actually rationalize the theft for them ideologically.

>> No.71750444

>>71750391
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4XA701_vMU

>> No.71750496

>>71745339
What's the weather like in Nigeria today?

>> No.71750548

>>71750252

Software has been getting cheaper as the years go by. Software as a service is indeed fraud, but software in the 80s cost a lot more than it does today, and that's not counting for inflation.

>> No.71752388

Friendly reminder COINTELPRO exists and they push an agenda against piracy too.

>> No.71752454

>>71745339
>theft
>no money makes it to the developer
>piracy
>no money makes it to the developer
If you can't see the problem here then you're probably a dumb nigger or white trailer park trash.

>> No.71752532

>>71752454
4/10 is the best I can do.

>> No.71752544
File: 1.39 MB, 452x306, 1559675252564.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71752544

>>71752532
3.6/10

>> No.71752563

>>71752454
This only counts if the person pirating it would get it regardless.

So if the pirate would otherwise not spend money on it, the developers not sales remain the same, but the person who developed it gained a new viewer, who may want to spend money on them now or later because of said piracy.

>> No.71752668

>>71745339
Of course, only scarce resources can be owned.

>> No.71752799

>>71747789
>>71749935
Y'all are retarded. Inflation is necessary for a growing economy and population. Otherwise you'll be dividing the same pool of money across a larger group of people.

>> No.71753246

>>71752799
Inflation is necessary, Fiat is not. Taxation is still theft, even if it is "necessary" for society.

>> No.71753727

>>71746229
Holy shit nigger, do you know what a comma is?

>> No.71753990

>>71745339
why would programmers write programs if nobody wants to pay for them? it would be better for them to just become farmers.

>> No.71754010

>>71752563
Without piracy, a person is forced to pay for software if they want to use it. With piracy, they have the option not to pay. The potential for a lost sale that would otherwise be guaranteed if the person wanted the software is more important than the potential for a new one that's created through a person using said software without paying for it. While there are some situations where people will never use said software if not for piracy, there are also situations where people will also never pay for that software simply because they can get it for free. I don't think anyone can really say that the potential of the former is better than the potential of the latter.

At the end of the day, if they didn't pay for it, they shouldn't be allowed to use it.

>> No.71754045

>>71747789
you forgot that when the government prints money it devalues all of the money in everyone's savings account. it is essentially theft of your savings.

>> No.71754063

>>71752799
>Otherwise you'll be dividing the same pool of money across a larger group of people.
it is trivial to realise that when this occurs your can purchase more with less money; all without stealing from everyone's savings

>> No.71754207

>>71745339
>>71745348
Not really. What you steal through piracy is indeed not 0s and 1s but someone's workhours.

>> No.71754245

>>71745339

Look at it this way, if Jesus came back and bought 1 loaf of bread, cast a spell and created 100,000.000 more loaves out of nothing, would he be guilty of bread piracy? After all, the millions of people he could feed would not have bread they otherwise would have had to buy, thus depriving the bread company of revenue.

>> No.71754263

>>71745339
Credit card fraud must not be either seeing as how the money in your account is just 1's and 0's.

>> No.71754279

>>71754010
Adobe wouldn't be where they are if almost every photofag didn't start pirating their shit.

Piracy benefits companies.

>> No.71754285

>>71754063
This would enforce hoarding. What's the point of spending your money if you'll just get exponentially richer sitting on it and doing nothing? Moreover, why should people get exponentially richer just by having money? There are a lot of other problems in your viewpoint that are "trivial" to realize.

>> No.71754290

>>71754245
>would he be guilty of bread piracy?
Yes but noone would be bothered - it's Jesus after all - same as noone would be bothered if he decided to gives away copies of software.

But YOU are NOT Jesus (Christ, at least).

>> No.71754298
File: 339 KB, 423x386, chaika.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71754298

>>71754207
>boss didnt pay my salary
>sue him for theft
>get laughed out of court
wtf i trusted you

>> No.71754314

>>71754290
you dont speak for God
you dont get to decide who is His messiah
fucking atheists, why are you all so retarded?

>> No.71754340
File: 69 KB, 300x300, 1548970411444.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71754340

I don't even give a fuck
I just want free shit

>> No.71754359

>>71754314
>implying Jesus will come back as advocate for criminals

You pirate scum are trying really hard to make a grey area out of something that's a really clear black and white situation.

>> No.71754372

>>71754245
He would bankrupt every breadmaker in existence. Bread would also become so devalued it would be worth next to nothing. Food in general would become incredibly devalued as there is a perfectly available and free source of it.

>> No.71754382

>>71754340
Basically pirate mentality regardless if posted ironically or not. Everything else is just excuses to convince yourselves you're not thieves.

>> No.71754398

>>71754372
>Food in general would become incredibly devalued
Maybe not in general as you can't have a complete diet with bread alone, the things that would compliment bread would probably be fine.

>> No.71754416

>>71754382
its a crime without victims

>> No.71754483

>>71754416
>I don't even give a fuck
>I just want free shit
>I-i-it's a c-c-crime without victims! My conscience is crystal clear!
Certainly the people who create software for living are not victims of this theft, not at all.

>> No.71754513

>>71754207
haha thinking that is worth $$$. that's not how real life works bud.

>> No.71754555

I'm honestly amazed by the mental gymnastics people go through to claim piracy isn't theft.
Piracy is obviously theft, no matter how hard you try to deny it.
It may be justifiable in some cases, but at the end of the day, you are effectively robbing someone of the possibility of making money. Period.

>> No.71754560

>>71754513
>workhours are not worth $$$
Boooy just wait until the billions of working people worldwide hear this! Nobel prize is coming!

>> No.71754589

>>71754483
enough people will buy their product if its good enough.
developers have to put in effort to survive.

>> No.71754592

>pirate software
>end up liking it
>buy it to support the developer

>pirate software
>end up not liking it
>the only thing lost was a bit of my time (and in turn money)

moralfags BLOWN THE FUCK OUT with FACTS and LOGIC

>> No.71754624

artist produces a painting
you copy that painting
>I mean I wasn't going to buy his picture anyways lolz
>but now that I have a copy of it I might buy some of his art in the future!
Hm, but does this actually ever happen?
What's worse, is that people then go:
>lul why u become an artist lmao poorfag idiot XD
We already have a real-world example of what happens when shit is copied, the author gets fucking nothing. Nobody ever buys that artist's art because they were able to get it for free, they just stick it into their pictures folder and forget the person even exists.
>b-but exposure!
>potential for sale!
You can't run a business or feed yourself on exposure, you cunt. Potentially losing a sale that is guaranteed if someone wants a copy of something is way worse than potentially gaining a sale because they got that something FOR FREE.
While software companies do make money, many of them have a hard time keeping the lights on, in some cases every sale is important, especially for smaller companies. If you're poor, save up the fucking money and BUY it. At the very least don't pirate from smaller developers.

>> No.71754627

>>71754592
>imagines the ideal world
In reality:
>pirate software
>end up liking it
>don't even give a fuck
>just want free shit

>> No.71754698

>>71754592
Most software have an evaluation or trial period. Your example only works for software that doesn't.

>> No.71754705

>>71754698
but I wanna see if the full features are as good as the trial ones.

>> No.71754778

>>71754705
Still restricted to software that actually limits functionality during a trial, most don't. Plus you can generally look up YouTube videos of people using the software if they do. Zero need for you to pirate it just to "test" it or see how it works.

>> No.71754797

>>71754778
I only want to use the full software 1 time, no need to buy the full package.

>> No.71754835
File: 1.17 MB, 2480x3720, the meat thief.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71754835

>it's OK for me to steal this meat, I wasn't going to pay for it anyway

>> No.71754843

>>71754797
So you want to use the software without actually paying for it?

>> No.71754851

ever notice how moralfags ALWAYS have to resort to analogies to support their retarded beliefs? they literally cannot argue that piracy is theft, so they have to make the argument easier to attack, literally using a fallacy to try and hide the truth

truly disgusting creatures

>> No.71754854

>>71754797
>I just want one bite of this burger, no need to buy the whole thing

>> No.71754883

>>71754851
See
>>71754010

I'm not arguing that piracy is theft however, just that it's copyright infringement and should be illegal.

>> No.71754884

>>71754835
i would download a car t b h

>> No.71754887

>>71754843
yes but I only want to use it like once, mabye twice but probably not.
Its bullshit I have to pay 40 dollars for this.

>>71754854
its not a burger tho
I just use it once and nobody cares or will even know I did.

>> No.71754888

>>71745339
>You can't steal 0s and 1s.
But you can deprive the owner of the value of your lost sale. And if you weren't going to buy it why do you need to steal it?

>> No.71754915

>>71754883
moving the goalpost

lick more jew boot, moralfag, go pray to chri "spread the other cheek" st

>> No.71754917

>>71754279
Many people have paid for Adobe's products and have always done so. If what you're saying is true, that they wouldn't be anywhere without piracy, they would have gone bankrupt a long time ago because "almost every photofag" was pirating their shit. Realistically piracy accounts for a very small portion of total software pieces distributed and this has always been the case, that doesn't mean it's okay.

>> No.71754918

>>71754888
but I have no money so no money was lost since there was no money in my possession that could go to the developer

>> No.71754960
File: 29 KB, 594x582, 1558422673491.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71754960

>>71750000
What an immense waste of quads

>> No.71754961

>>71754888
>But you can deprive the owner of the value of your lost sale. And if you weren't going to buy it why do you need to steal it?
Not that anon, but what if the person can't afford it? They then pirate it and find it's incredibly useful/enjoyable/whatever and may purchase it when feasible. As a result of their good experience, they praise the product and suggest it to others on their favorite imageboard/forum/community leading to a couple sales. Would the creator/owner of the product rather they didn't pirate and spread word of their product?

>> No.71754977

>>71754887
>I just use it once and nobody cares or will even know I did
I'm sure the people that made the software would care if they knew. If nobody sees you do it that does not make it okay.
>It's bullshit I have to pay $40 to actually use the software
You are using the functionality of the software, you should pay for it. If you aren't happy with their pricing find an alternative or make a suggestion to the company to change it. If what the software does is really so important to you, even if you only need to use it once or twice, then it clearly has value to you that's probably equivalent to its cost.

>> No.71755002

>>71754887
>nobody cares or will even know I did
Much like nobody gives a shit if you steal food from a major grocer and don't get caught. Does that make it okay? Does that mean you aren't still hurting the grocer by not paying for the food?

>> No.71755076

>>71754285
People get richer by just owning land.
There are tons of other passive forms of income too.
If hoarding currency (ie. Gold) was so lucrative the elites would have never pushed so hard to adopt Fiat and the Federal Reserve System.

>> No.71755090

>>71754918
>since there was no money in my possession that could go to the developer
But you could earn money and then you would have money in your possession that could go to the developer. Being broke isn't an excuse to infringe a copyright or steal something.
>>71754915
I never moved my goalpost because I never attempted to argue otherwise, brainlet.

>> No.71755104

>>71754977
nah man I just take it for free, use it once and then uninstall. if I need it again I pirate it again.

much simpler than paying, storing some licence account details somewhere
too much hassle.

>> No.71755109

>>71755090
status of the goalpost: moved
status of the jewish anus: licked by you
status of the the truth: revealed by me

>> No.71755122

>>71755090
>But you could earn money
I do but its not enough so I can't just spend it on software that I maybe use once or twice.
dont really want to work more so I just take it for free. its no big deal.

>> No.71755133

>>71755076
Passive income is different from what I'm talking about. Rather than owning land, rather than actually having passive income, they just have money, and that money dramatically increases in value over time. There is no incentive to invest that money back into the economy.

>> No.71755148

>>71755109
I can clearly see you are just a troll and have no valid rebuttal
Here's your (you)

>> No.71755149

>>71752532
>>71752563
At the end of the day you used a good that would have otherwise been impossible to use had you not given money to the developer. You are a thief, a welfare whore, a low life nobody, and no one will ever like you because you have horrible morals.

>> No.71755158
File: 267 KB, 534x588, drooling retard.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71755158

>>71745339
>You can't steal 0s and 1s

>> No.71755172

>>71755148
There is noting to counter-argue because you've been debunked already

>> No.71755239

>>71755133
>Passive income is different from what I'm talking about
Not really.
>they just have money, and that money dramatically increases in value over time
Replace "money" with land or precious metals.

Once again, Fiat didn't spawn out of a populist movement. The government decided to pay people with paper that only held value due to the threat of violence. The aristocrats wanted absolute control over the monetary system.

>> No.71755251

>>71755172
>it's true because I say it is
Last (you)

>> No.71755280

>>71755239
Land/precious metals aren't stagnant money. An economy just would not function properly if everything devalued constantly and you got exponentially richer by sitting on your stack.

>> No.71755364

>>71755251
>literally resorting to a strawman fallacy
*yawn* moralfags are so easy to debunk m'dudes

>> No.71755392

>>71745339
100% agree with you. How can piracy be theft? Theft is completely different and a real crime.

>> No.71755412

So people here really believe that downloading 1 song is the same as stealing $150,000 dollars?

>> No.71755418
File: 161 KB, 1138x1332, Screen-Shot-2018-11-04-at-06.24.57.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71755418

>>71755280
>Land/precious metals aren't stagnant money.
Exactly, they're capital... actual physical and tangible money. You don't need to point a gun at someone to tell them that land and gold have value.
>An economy just would not function properly if everything devalued constantly and you got exponentially richer by sitting on your stack.
Gold, silver and other precious metals are mined regularly and the value of land is quite dynamic.
The economy functions fine with them.

Pic related. Remember that time they had Gaddafi killed for trying to implement a Gold standard in Africa.

>> No.71755419

>>71755364
Never argued that piracy is theft, only that it hurts developers. No strawmanning and no debunk.

>> No.71755452

>>71755412
Piracy technically is a form of copyright infringement, and this, a crime.
That said, its negative impact has been massively exaggerated.

>> No.71755456

Here's something creators of inelectual "property" need to get through their skulls: "creative work" is a good hobby, but a retarded occupation.

>> No.71755462

>>71755418
Again, land/precious metals =\= money. Just because their value fluctuates in our current economy doesn't rebut that in your vision they would constantly devalue and that you will get exponentially richer just by sitting on your money. That kind of economy will eventually crumble as goods become nearly worthless and everyone hoards their money and sits on their stack.

>> No.71755481

>>71755452
>copyright infringement, and this, a crime.

Why is that a crime exactly? How is it even a crime if you aren't making money off of it and using it for personal use only?

>> No.71755515

>>71755481
You are depriving the developer of their income. Moreover, it's illegal. You can't argue that it's not a crime, because it is. You can argue that it shouldn't be a crime, but then you would have to undoubtedly prove that it does not have any negative impact.

>> No.71755545

>>71755481
>Why is that a crime exactly?
Because the law said so. This isn't up to debate: if it's an act that goes against the law, and is punishable by the state, it qualifies as crime.
Now, you may, from an ethical and moral point of view, justify it, but that doesn't take away that, according to the current laws, it undeniably is a crime.
What you may consider a crime or not is irrelevant. The law decides.

>> No.71755562

>>71755515
>>You are depriving the developer of their income

Nonsense, they have been paid for their work. How else did they make a game.

>>71755545
What law? What is this law?

>> No.71755568

>>71755462
Nigger what, have you never opened book in your life?
>Fiat money is a currency without intrinsic value that has been established as money, often by government regulation. Fiat money does not have use value, and has value only because a government maintains its value, or because parties engaging in exchange agree on its value.[1] It was introduced as an alternative to commodity money and representative money. Commodity money is created from a good, often a precious metal such as gold or silver, which has uses other than as a medium of exchange (such a good is called a commodity). Representative money is similar to fiat money, but it represents a claim on a commodity (which can be redeemed to a greater or lesser extent).

>That kind of economy will eventually crumble as goods become nearly worthless and everyone hoards their money and sits on their stack.
Ah yes, before Richard Nixon (our Lord and Savior) appeared the world economy was in shambles!

>> No.71755585

>>71755568
>the world economy was in shambles

It was.

>> No.71755603

>>71755562
I'm talking about the person/entity selling the game. Solo developers don't get paid at all, they absolutely rely on sales for income. Pirating their software deprives them of the sale and thus their income.

>> No.71755617

>>71755568
I was never arguing about fiat, just your idiotic vision for how things should work.

>> No.71755659

>>71755603
No, I'm not getting it. How did they make the game with no money? And if the game doesn't sell they go broke? But if it wasn't pirated their sales would increase exponentially?

Any small dev out there, if their game is being pirated will make enough sales anyway to make more games. I have never not once heard of a studio, large or small, closing down because of piracy.

>> No.71755671

The true thinking man lives just outside the bounds of the social contract. Companies do this as well, Telecoms breaking consumer protection laws because the fine they end up paying is just a cost of business. Piracy is just the consumer doing the same thing. Pushing the boundaries of what is and isn't allowed is just part of the game anons.

>> No.71755799

>>71755659
>how did they make the game with no money
I'm currently developing my own game and not getting paid by anyone to do it. If my game sells and I'm able to switch over to development full time, I will then explicitly be relying on game sales as my source of income. Developers like Coldrice are in that exact boat.

It's not about whether or not they close down due to piracy. The issue is that there's no exchange being made for the product. You are not paying for it, and the developer is losing money because of that. It has a negative impact on the developer, it might not be enough to make them go bankrupt, but it's still a negative impact.

>> No.71755829

>>71755659
>it's not like it will cause their studio to close down so that makes it okay!
lmao

>> No.71755897

>>71752799
Fucking retard. I didn't say that inflation was bad in my post. I said that the specific type of inflation which is created when governments print money to cover expenditures is bad. Normal, controlled increases to the money supply by the lowering of borrowing rates with the central bank != the government just willy nilly printing off money like retards. That kind of shit only happens in places with literal monkeys in charge (see Zimbabwe).
>>71753246
This isn't about fiat vs backed currencies shit for brains. It was brought up as am example of someone making "just a copy" financially damaging others without their consent. Also fiat currency is totally necessary, if you think we should go back to the gold standard or some other nonsense have fun with your cyclical depressions and inability to control your own money supply.
>>71754045
How did I forget that? That's exactly my point. It reduces the value of all of the other existing money. That would obviously include the money in your savings account.
>>71754245
This analogy is idiotic. Firstly, anyone can make bread, not everyone can make a multimillion dollar Hollywood movie or AAA title. Secondly, bread isn't intellectual property, it costs physical resources to produce. Lastly It would obviously bankrupt bread makers, which would obviously be largely negative. If you want an interesting example similar to this in real life, read about Tom's shoes in Africa
>tldr
>hipsters decide to start company to donate shoes to Africa
>over a decade the shoe market in Africa crashes
>All cobblers go out of business and locally made shoes are a thing of the past
>regions of Africa now 100% dependant on Tom's for their footwear

>> No.71755898

>>71755515
Alcohol and porn have a negative impact on society. Should the big daddy govt. put people in jail for drinking and masturbating?
>inb4 pol says yes

Most crimes aren't just crimes just because they have a "negative impact." Niggers are in prison because of rape, muder and actual theft.

The govt. can deprive me of my freedom soley to protect someone elses profits.

>>71755545
Imagine being this much of a bootlicker.

>>71755617
What are you talking about?

>> No.71755911

>>71755799
What would be happier about, 10 people buying your game or 1000 people pirating it? Would you rather your game played by 10 customers or 1000 pirates?

>> No.71755932

>>71755829
Well you can't have it both ways. Claim piracy is killing your business but it turns out it actually isn't.

>> No.71755997

>>71755671
High IQ post.

>> No.71756007

>>71755898
>merely stating what the law says is bootlicking
So what, do you now have to delude yourself to not be considered one?

>> No.71756061

>>71754063
Yeah but there's less money to go around. So it wouldn't change a thing other than making interest rates higher. Do you really think that never increasing the money supply would actually be a good idea?
>>71755133
The money they hold is already invested into the economy you moron. That's how fractional reserve banking works. By holding the money in bank accounts, other people can borrow that money, and the bank doesn't need to borrow from the fed, so interest rates go down and mom and pop can get a loan to start their business or whatever. When you put your money in a bank, the risk associated is the borrowers defaulting. "Rich people" do more for the economy by literally just sitting around than you do slaving away at your McJob.
>>71755239
The adoption of fiat wasn't about turning people into sheep. It was about having closer control over the boom/bust cycles that caused people to die in huge waves during famine/depression.

>> No.71756089

>>71755897
If millions of people decided to pirate spore does that mean EAs game lost value?
No, because its not like there's a finite number of copies that they cold of sold

Just like Fiat, IP requires violence in order to force people to accept its supposed "value."

There are other ways to make money on software, music, etc. The retarded idea that you have to sell it is perpetuated by companies who would rather lobby than change their business.

>>71756007
What I do or do not consider a crime is totally relevant. In a democracy how else is the law supposed to be changed?

you're a bootlicker cunt because you accept the law blindly.

>> No.71756125

>>71755419
>tu quoque
*yawn*

>> No.71756609

>>71756125
Not even tu quoque, I'm not discrediting you in any way. Merely stating that I was never arguing that piracy is theft. You can keep blindly listing fallacies and that's not going to change anything. You have no argument.

>> No.71756630

>>71756125
>fallacy fallacy
*yawn*

>> No.71756645

>>71747688
Nice try, commie.

>> No.71756745

@NPC71756609
@NPC71756630
last word
*yawn*

>> No.71757494

>>71745467
So killing is actually theft because you're removing the atoms?

>> No.71757503

>>71756061
>The adoption of fiat wasn't about turning people into sheep. It was about having closer control over the boom/bust cycles that caused people to die in huge waves during famine/depression.

>yes goy we had to take complete control of the monetary system because we care about you and want to protect you.
>Thats exactly why the goyim cant vote on our policy or even see whats going on inside the Fed.

>Goy you must understand we HAD to kill Gadaffi before his gold standard caused us to lose precious sheckles in Afri- I mean before the economy crashed and Libyans suffered.
>Aha look at how well the Libyans are doing today! We really saved them from that brutal dictator and his mad schemes!

>> No.71757541

>>71754560
>>workhours are not worth $$$
>Boooy just wait until the billions of working people worldwide hear this! Nobel prize is coming!
Yeeeeeaaaahhhhhhh, all those companies/bands going out of business because of piracy, yeah man.

>> No.71758190

>>71757541

>It's okay as long as this extreme scenario doesn't occur

>> No.71759708

>>71758190
But nothing occurs. There are countless bands admitting on record that they would never gets the opportunity to tour if it weren't for piracy and people knowing about that (aka getting to listen to their music any way they can).
Also didn't see Hollywood failing nor game studios specifically because of piracy.

>> No.71760072

>>71756089
>What I do or do not consider a crime is totally relevant. In a democracy how else is the law supposed to be changed?
>you're a bootlicker cunt because you accept the law blindly.
Check out this faggot. Merely stating that some activity is a crime under current laws (which is an objective truth) doesn't necessarily mean you "blindly accept the law". Whether you consider it a crime or not is irrelevant. You may argue that the law is wrong. But saying it's not a crime under current laws is objectively wrong, because it is.
You are the stupidest person I've ever seen on this board, and an arrogant faggot to boot. You'll never get anything done in life with that attitude.

>> No.71760340

>>71747688
thank you for your clear words

>> No.71760520

>>71745339
if i cant pirate it im not going to watch or listen to it. they dont get my money either way.

>> No.71760552

>>71756089
>If millions of people decided to pirate spore does that mean EAs game lost value?
>No, because its not like there's a finite number of copies that they cold of sold
Actually yes it does diminish the value of the game you absolute mong. There isn't just a finite amount of games, there's also a finite amount of consumers. If people pirate the game, the amount consumers who were willing to buy the game ib the first place goes down while the supply of the game remains unchanged, and so the value of the remaining (unpurchased) copies decreases.

>> No.71762357

>>71754207
wrong.
their work hours produced some code.
they chose to spend those hours, no one forced them to, and the same amount of work hours were spent whether or not you pirate
so it's not a factor.

>> No.71762374

>>71754359
this is a black and white situation.
making a copy of software doesn't deprive anyone of anything.
it's is not morally wrong.

>> No.71762406

>>71754555
piracy is not theft.
the two things are completely different.
in theft, you are depriving someone of something that they made.
in piracy, you use a ship to plunder and pillage.
when you copy ones and zeros you aren't depriving anyone of anything.
it is not morally wrong and in no way equivalent to theft.

>> No.71762416

>>71745339
Also water is wet.

>> No.71762424

>>71745467
Removing is not replicating. The original is lost in the first case, conserved in the second.

>> No.71762434

>>71754207
You just stole time I'll never get back with that shit post.

>> No.71762441

>>71754624
>artist produces painting
a physical thing.
>you copy that painting
first, no one is deprived of anything. second, people do this all the time legally. have you never taken an art class?

people made art and writings for thousands of years before copyright existed.
if copyright were abolished tomorrow, some people would be out of a job, but things would continue to get made.

>> No.71762467

>>71754627
and?
it's not morally wrong if i decide i like a chair and make one of my own, with my own tools.
you're not really making the argument that making something with your own tools is morally wrong, are you?

>> No.71762480

>>71754888
no.
you can't deprive someone of something that wasn't theirs to begin with.

>> No.71762519

>>71745339
>be UK man
>watch BBC One without appropriate loicense
>£1000 fine or six months in maximum security Turkish-Colombian prison.

>> No.71762529

>>71762480
public contract != agreement

>> No.71762578

>>71762529
correct. we are in agreement.

>> No.71762598

>>71747630
>Robbing someone of the opportunity to make money

You can't rob someone of the opportunity to make money. This is twisted reasoning, like having your girlfriend "stolen" by a better man. The same twisted reasoning applies when people argue they have been "ripped off" by a product they charged more for than necessary - this time, demandsided twisted logic instead of suppliesided twisted logic.

Theft is when you lose something because someone took it without your consent or knowledge, usually couvert.

Robbing is when somebody else purposely took it away from you, usually using violence.

Copying is an act of (re)creation where the original is kept intact, with the copy usually being lower quality than the original.

Next time, before developing something, make sure you have a market that wishes to buy it from you - this is called market surveillance.

Otherwise, argue for basic life support if market dynamics work against you - this is the idea of a welfare state.

>> No.71762601

>>71745575
>When you think about that proprietary software as money
So I won't, problem solved.

>> No.71762722
File: 52 KB, 770x425, gunther.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71762722

>>71762598
tfw pirates expose themselves as cuckolds

>> No.71764128

>>71760072
So the first anon asks "why" piracy is a crime.
>"Thats irrelevant, it's illegal so its a crime."
Anon says, "Yea I know it's a crime, so in other words why is it illegal?"

>"Its illegal because its a crime, and a crime because its illegal."
You don't consider that circular reasoning?

The debate has almost nothing to do with "the law" but you can't stop bringing it up because you're a bootlicker.

>But saying it's not a crime under current laws is objectively wrong, because it is.
And point me to where ANYONE said or even implied that. I've tried following the entire comment chain.

>>71760552
>Actually yes it does diminish the value of the game you absolute mong.
Value implies scarcity. To me the game is worth nothing because there's a near infinite supply of it.
From EAs perspective they think the game has value because it could make them money. The amount of people who would buy a game (they could own for free) obviously diminishes due to piracy.

Why should I sympathize with them? They're a massive company that made a costly miscalculation.
If it weren't for the price protection racket called "copyright law" they would only have to compete with the pressures of a free market. If they can't compete with pirates then they can go bankrupt.

>If people pirate the game, the amount consumers who were willing to buy the game ib the first place goes down
True
>while the supply of the game remains unchanged, and so the value of the remaining (unpurchased) copies decreases.
The supply of the game remains unchanged because its literally infinite. Everyone on this planet could own as many copies as they wanted. Meaning that the copies never had value in the first place.

>> No.71765878

>>71764128
You can't separate legal and ethical matters. That's the sign of very low IQ, something you can't disguise with arrogance.

>> No.71765959
File: 46 KB, 499x338, IMG_1636.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
71765959

>>71765878

>> No.71766089

>>71745919
Theft implies that there was an income in the first place to steal.
And you can't steal information. It's not an opinion, it's physically impossible.
You can read, write and arguably delete(real deletion requires the black hole) an info. You can't steal it.
This is why it's called the copyright infringement and not theft.

>> No.71766443

>>71754372

>He would bankrupt every breadmaker in existence.
So?

Bread would also become so devalued it would be worth next to nothing.
Not so, there will aways be a demand for food, but once you buy a movie, the demand is gone.

Food in general would become incredibly devalued as there is a perfectly available and free source of it.

Absolutely, so then the only conclusion we can make is that even if we could end world hunger, we wouldn't, we would happily let people starve, all so hollywood might not lose a sliver of revenue.

>> No.71766492

It is theft you fag

I own my work, I own my intellectual property, and you are distributing/consuming it without my consent because it was stolen from my business

You KNOW this

If you'd ever actually made anything and watched a bunch of faggots pirate it instead of pay a few dollars you'd feel the same exact way

The whole reason this conversation exists is because you know very well that this is amoral theft, but require methods to rationalize it to yourself

>> No.71766533

>>71755545
>Because the law said so.

You'd do great at Neuremburg

>> No.71766606

>>71766492
>my intellectual property
It's no longer yours if you've shared it with someone else, retard.
>because it was stolen from my business
IF it's actually stolen, as in you haven't released it yet or it's source code is stolen then yes, it's theft. But we're talking about already released information (software, movies, music) which is and should be considered public domain. You can then only charge for streaming or uploading it to people.

>> No.71766621

>>71756061
>It was about having closer control over the boom/bust cycles that caused people to die in huge waves during famine/depression.

If those people didn't create a reserve during the boom then they deserve it. Imagine being less intelligent than a squirrel.

>> No.71767448

>>71766533
What is *your* definition of crime, then?

>> No.71768212

>>71745339
I think if copyright was set at 25 years flat rather than life+70 people wouldn't care as much about defending piracy.

>> No.71768316

>>71745666
Why are people so hellbent on conflating piracy with theft when they could be arguing this instead? You're all still criminals.

>> No.71768418

>>71755133
What if you want goods and services?

>> No.71768419

>>71745339
No one says piracy is theft. It's unauthorized copying of copyrighted material that would otherwise be sold.

>> No.71768917

>>71766621
>reserve during the boom then they deserve it
Having a reserve means fuck all during hyper-inflation. Are you just pretending to be retarded at this point? Or are you 13 and you just discovered Ron Paul?

>> No.71769122

>>71745339
Property is a social consruct

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action