▲ 1365 ▼ Don't let the corporations tell you otherwise (lemmy.ohaa.xyz) submitted 2 years ago by FQQD@lemmy.ohaa.xyz to c/memes@lemmy.world 331 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) If you disagree with the original terms, i.e. the game is available on a platform with DRM, then just don't get it and completion to the devs. Our pirate it but don't pretend that you're morally right to do it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Nah. DRM in its current version is morally wrong. Circumventing it is perfectly fine. It's essentially an industry wide price collusion, which I'll note is illegal, but will never be broken up because the US antitrust agencies have been hollowed out to nothing. In the same vein, if an employer refuses to pay you for time worked, your chances of recovering that pay is slim. In that circumstance, I would say taking the amount you are owed from the till is perfectly fine, morally. You would probably disagree, because you're a boot licker and believe that whatever the law says is morally good. I understand the concept in abstract, but I will fundamentally never be able to put myself in the head space of someone like you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Dude, in this example you're the employer stealing from the worker! The only thing wrong here is people that are unable to admit that what they're doing has consequences on the people who created the media they're pirating and using mental gymnastic like I've never seen before to justify their choice and to feel morally justified to do it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Separate example. Ignore everything else we've been talking about. I'm trying to illustrate where you stand on morality. Would it be wrong to steal from the till? I suspect you'd say yes, which means we have fundamental, irreconcilable differences in how we view the entire concept of morality. Which then, relating back to piracy, means we will never see eye to eye because we disagree about the most fundamental aspects of the argument. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) It's an irrelevant example in this conversation because you're reversing the roles. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's not related to piracy at all, it's just an illustration of your personal views. There are no roles. It's not an analogy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Then in this case I would tell you that taking the money from the till also makes you a thief because you're getting an unverified amount of money on which you didn't pay taxes and there are legal means to get the money you're owed. Laws would agree with me and if you want to live in society then I'm sorry to tell you that it's something we can't do without. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Like I thought, we just have entirely different worldviews at an extremely fundamental level. There's no seeing eye to eye because we're approaching it differently. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) there is nothing immoral with letting someone share information with you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) There is if it's information that's for sale by its creator and what you're doing is copying it therefore keeping them from profiting from their work. Some people do projects out of passion and let people do what they want with their creations, others create to make a living and by not paying them you're preventing them from doing so. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) they can sell it to anyone who wants to buy it. I am not preventing them at all permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) You're still profiting from their work without compensating them, that's called slavery enter I'm from. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) there is no profit, the labor isn't forced, it's not slavery permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Consuming the fruit of someone's labor is "profiting from it" The labor needs to exist in order for you to have access to the content you're pirating so yes in a way it's forced to exist otherwise this conversation wouldn't happen in the first place as there would be no content to pirate. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) you're making up that definition of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) To profit > to obtain an advantage or benefit The entertainment you get from the product is a form of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) you are stretching the term to meaninglessness permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago I'm using an official definition of the word permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) no one made them produce the game. they could have chosen not to do that, and there would be no consequences at all. it's not slavery. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Then no one should buy anything until we reach a point where no one produces anything because there's no incentive to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) this sentence makes me suspect English is not your first language because it makes no sense. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago How? I mean, by your logic why should people buy anything instead of just copying/stealing it? No one gets hurt if we do so, you said so yourself! permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone tells you about the biggest play of the Superbowl, are they enslaving the NFL owners? get real. sharing stories, songs, tools, and skills is a basic human activity. it's not immoral. trying to prevent it is immoral. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) You can share stories of when you played a game, it doesn't mean you can copy the game itself so you still have access to it and someone else does too without any compensation going to the creator. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone wants to share a game with me, I am doing nothing wrong by accepting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago That logic only works if you ignore the fact that someone had to put work into creating the game. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Nah. DRM in its current version is morally wrong. Circumventing it is perfectly fine. It's essentially an industry wide price collusion, which I'll note is illegal, but will never be broken up because the US antitrust agencies have been hollowed out to nothing. In the same vein, if an employer refuses to pay you for time worked, your chances of recovering that pay is slim. In that circumstance, I would say taking the amount you are owed from the till is perfectly fine, morally. You would probably disagree, because you're a boot licker and believe that whatever the law says is morally good. I understand the concept in abstract, but I will fundamentally never be able to put myself in the head space of someone like you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Dude, in this example you're the employer stealing from the worker! The only thing wrong here is people that are unable to admit that what they're doing has consequences on the people who created the media they're pirating and using mental gymnastic like I've never seen before to justify their choice and to feel morally justified to do it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Separate example. Ignore everything else we've been talking about. I'm trying to illustrate where you stand on morality. Would it be wrong to steal from the till? I suspect you'd say yes, which means we have fundamental, irreconcilable differences in how we view the entire concept of morality. Which then, relating back to piracy, means we will never see eye to eye because we disagree about the most fundamental aspects of the argument. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) It's an irrelevant example in this conversation because you're reversing the roles. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's not related to piracy at all, it's just an illustration of your personal views. There are no roles. It's not an analogy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Then in this case I would tell you that taking the money from the till also makes you a thief because you're getting an unverified amount of money on which you didn't pay taxes and there are legal means to get the money you're owed. Laws would agree with me and if you want to live in society then I'm sorry to tell you that it's something we can't do without. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Like I thought, we just have entirely different worldviews at an extremely fundamental level. There's no seeing eye to eye because we're approaching it differently. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Dude, in this example you're the employer stealing from the worker! The only thing wrong here is people that are unable to admit that what they're doing has consequences on the people who created the media they're pirating and using mental gymnastic like I've never seen before to justify their choice and to feel morally justified to do it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Separate example. Ignore everything else we've been talking about. I'm trying to illustrate where you stand on morality. Would it be wrong to steal from the till? I suspect you'd say yes, which means we have fundamental, irreconcilable differences in how we view the entire concept of morality. Which then, relating back to piracy, means we will never see eye to eye because we disagree about the most fundamental aspects of the argument. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) It's an irrelevant example in this conversation because you're reversing the roles. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's not related to piracy at all, it's just an illustration of your personal views. There are no roles. It's not an analogy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Then in this case I would tell you that taking the money from the till also makes you a thief because you're getting an unverified amount of money on which you didn't pay taxes and there are legal means to get the money you're owed. Laws would agree with me and if you want to live in society then I'm sorry to tell you that it's something we can't do without. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Like I thought, we just have entirely different worldviews at an extremely fundamental level. There's no seeing eye to eye because we're approaching it differently. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Separate example. Ignore everything else we've been talking about. I'm trying to illustrate where you stand on morality. Would it be wrong to steal from the till? I suspect you'd say yes, which means we have fundamental, irreconcilable differences in how we view the entire concept of morality. Which then, relating back to piracy, means we will never see eye to eye because we disagree about the most fundamental aspects of the argument. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) It's an irrelevant example in this conversation because you're reversing the roles. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's not related to piracy at all, it's just an illustration of your personal views. There are no roles. It's not an analogy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Then in this case I would tell you that taking the money from the till also makes you a thief because you're getting an unverified amount of money on which you didn't pay taxes and there are legal means to get the money you're owed. Laws would agree with me and if you want to live in society then I'm sorry to tell you that it's something we can't do without. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Like I thought, we just have entirely different worldviews at an extremely fundamental level. There's no seeing eye to eye because we're approaching it differently. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) It's an irrelevant example in this conversation because you're reversing the roles. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's not related to piracy at all, it's just an illustration of your personal views. There are no roles. It's not an analogy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Then in this case I would tell you that taking the money from the till also makes you a thief because you're getting an unverified amount of money on which you didn't pay taxes and there are legal means to get the money you're owed. Laws would agree with me and if you want to live in society then I'm sorry to tell you that it's something we can't do without. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Like I thought, we just have entirely different worldviews at an extremely fundamental level. There's no seeing eye to eye because we're approaching it differently. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's not related to piracy at all, it's just an illustration of your personal views. There are no roles. It's not an analogy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Then in this case I would tell you that taking the money from the till also makes you a thief because you're getting an unverified amount of money on which you didn't pay taxes and there are legal means to get the money you're owed. Laws would agree with me and if you want to live in society then I'm sorry to tell you that it's something we can't do without. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Like I thought, we just have entirely different worldviews at an extremely fundamental level. There's no seeing eye to eye because we're approaching it differently. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) Then in this case I would tell you that taking the money from the till also makes you a thief because you're getting an unverified amount of money on which you didn't pay taxes and there are legal means to get the money you're owed. Laws would agree with me and if you want to live in society then I'm sorry to tell you that it's something we can't do without. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Like I thought, we just have entirely different worldviews at an extremely fundamental level. There's no seeing eye to eye because we're approaching it differently. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Like I thought, we just have entirely different worldviews at an extremely fundamental level. There's no seeing eye to eye because we're approaching it differently. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) there is nothing immoral with letting someone share information with you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) There is if it's information that's for sale by its creator and what you're doing is copying it therefore keeping them from profiting from their work. Some people do projects out of passion and let people do what they want with their creations, others create to make a living and by not paying them you're preventing them from doing so. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) they can sell it to anyone who wants to buy it. I am not preventing them at all permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) You're still profiting from their work without compensating them, that's called slavery enter I'm from. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) there is no profit, the labor isn't forced, it's not slavery permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Consuming the fruit of someone's labor is "profiting from it" The labor needs to exist in order for you to have access to the content you're pirating so yes in a way it's forced to exist otherwise this conversation wouldn't happen in the first place as there would be no content to pirate. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) you're making up that definition of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) To profit > to obtain an advantage or benefit The entertainment you get from the product is a form of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) you are stretching the term to meaninglessness permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago I'm using an official definition of the word permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) no one made them produce the game. they could have chosen not to do that, and there would be no consequences at all. it's not slavery. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Then no one should buy anything until we reach a point where no one produces anything because there's no incentive to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) this sentence makes me suspect English is not your first language because it makes no sense. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago How? I mean, by your logic why should people buy anything instead of just copying/stealing it? No one gets hurt if we do so, you said so yourself! permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone tells you about the biggest play of the Superbowl, are they enslaving the NFL owners? get real. sharing stories, songs, tools, and skills is a basic human activity. it's not immoral. trying to prevent it is immoral. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) You can share stories of when you played a game, it doesn't mean you can copy the game itself so you still have access to it and someone else does too without any compensation going to the creator. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone wants to share a game with me, I am doing nothing wrong by accepting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago That logic only works if you ignore the fact that someone had to put work into creating the game. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) There is if it's information that's for sale by its creator and what you're doing is copying it therefore keeping them from profiting from their work. Some people do projects out of passion and let people do what they want with their creations, others create to make a living and by not paying them you're preventing them from doing so. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) they can sell it to anyone who wants to buy it. I am not preventing them at all permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) You're still profiting from their work without compensating them, that's called slavery enter I'm from. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) there is no profit, the labor isn't forced, it's not slavery permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Consuming the fruit of someone's labor is "profiting from it" The labor needs to exist in order for you to have access to the content you're pirating so yes in a way it's forced to exist otherwise this conversation wouldn't happen in the first place as there would be no content to pirate. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) you're making up that definition of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) To profit > to obtain an advantage or benefit The entertainment you get from the product is a form of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) you are stretching the term to meaninglessness permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago I'm using an official definition of the word permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) no one made them produce the game. they could have chosen not to do that, and there would be no consequences at all. it's not slavery. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Then no one should buy anything until we reach a point where no one produces anything because there's no incentive to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) this sentence makes me suspect English is not your first language because it makes no sense. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago How? I mean, by your logic why should people buy anything instead of just copying/stealing it? No one gets hurt if we do so, you said so yourself! permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone tells you about the biggest play of the Superbowl, are they enslaving the NFL owners? get real. sharing stories, songs, tools, and skills is a basic human activity. it's not immoral. trying to prevent it is immoral. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) You can share stories of when you played a game, it doesn't mean you can copy the game itself so you still have access to it and someone else does too without any compensation going to the creator. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone wants to share a game with me, I am doing nothing wrong by accepting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago That logic only works if you ignore the fact that someone had to put work into creating the game. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) they can sell it to anyone who wants to buy it. I am not preventing them at all permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) You're still profiting from their work without compensating them, that's called slavery enter I'm from. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) there is no profit, the labor isn't forced, it's not slavery permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Consuming the fruit of someone's labor is "profiting from it" The labor needs to exist in order for you to have access to the content you're pirating so yes in a way it's forced to exist otherwise this conversation wouldn't happen in the first place as there would be no content to pirate. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) you're making up that definition of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) To profit > to obtain an advantage or benefit The entertainment you get from the product is a form of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) you are stretching the term to meaninglessness permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago I'm using an official definition of the word permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) no one made them produce the game. they could have chosen not to do that, and there would be no consequences at all. it's not slavery. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Then no one should buy anything until we reach a point where no one produces anything because there's no incentive to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) this sentence makes me suspect English is not your first language because it makes no sense. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago How? I mean, by your logic why should people buy anything instead of just copying/stealing it? No one gets hurt if we do so, you said so yourself! permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone tells you about the biggest play of the Superbowl, are they enslaving the NFL owners? get real. sharing stories, songs, tools, and skills is a basic human activity. it's not immoral. trying to prevent it is immoral. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) You can share stories of when you played a game, it doesn't mean you can copy the game itself so you still have access to it and someone else does too without any compensation going to the creator. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone wants to share a game with me, I am doing nothing wrong by accepting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago That logic only works if you ignore the fact that someone had to put work into creating the game. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) You're still profiting from their work without compensating them, that's called slavery enter I'm from. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) there is no profit, the labor isn't forced, it's not slavery permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Consuming the fruit of someone's labor is "profiting from it" The labor needs to exist in order for you to have access to the content you're pirating so yes in a way it's forced to exist otherwise this conversation wouldn't happen in the first place as there would be no content to pirate. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) you're making up that definition of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) To profit > to obtain an advantage or benefit The entertainment you get from the product is a form of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) you are stretching the term to meaninglessness permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago I'm using an official definition of the word permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) no one made them produce the game. they could have chosen not to do that, and there would be no consequences at all. it's not slavery. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Then no one should buy anything until we reach a point where no one produces anything because there's no incentive to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) this sentence makes me suspect English is not your first language because it makes no sense. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago How? I mean, by your logic why should people buy anything instead of just copying/stealing it? No one gets hurt if we do so, you said so yourself! permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone tells you about the biggest play of the Superbowl, are they enslaving the NFL owners? get real. sharing stories, songs, tools, and skills is a basic human activity. it's not immoral. trying to prevent it is immoral. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) You can share stories of when you played a game, it doesn't mean you can copy the game itself so you still have access to it and someone else does too without any compensation going to the creator. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone wants to share a game with me, I am doing nothing wrong by accepting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago That logic only works if you ignore the fact that someone had to put work into creating the game. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) there is no profit, the labor isn't forced, it's not slavery permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Consuming the fruit of someone's labor is "profiting from it" The labor needs to exist in order for you to have access to the content you're pirating so yes in a way it's forced to exist otherwise this conversation wouldn't happen in the first place as there would be no content to pirate. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) you're making up that definition of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) To profit > to obtain an advantage or benefit The entertainment you get from the product is a form of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) you are stretching the term to meaninglessness permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago I'm using an official definition of the word permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) no one made them produce the game. they could have chosen not to do that, and there would be no consequences at all. it's not slavery. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Then no one should buy anything until we reach a point where no one produces anything because there's no incentive to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) this sentence makes me suspect English is not your first language because it makes no sense. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago How? I mean, by your logic why should people buy anything instead of just copying/stealing it? No one gets hurt if we do so, you said so yourself! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Consuming the fruit of someone's labor is "profiting from it" The labor needs to exist in order for you to have access to the content you're pirating so yes in a way it's forced to exist otherwise this conversation wouldn't happen in the first place as there would be no content to pirate. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) you're making up that definition of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) To profit > to obtain an advantage or benefit The entertainment you get from the product is a form of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) you are stretching the term to meaninglessness permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago I'm using an official definition of the word permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) no one made them produce the game. they could have chosen not to do that, and there would be no consequences at all. it's not slavery. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Then no one should buy anything until we reach a point where no one produces anything because there's no incentive to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) this sentence makes me suspect English is not your first language because it makes no sense. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago How? I mean, by your logic why should people buy anything instead of just copying/stealing it? No one gets hurt if we do so, you said so yourself! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) you're making up that definition of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) To profit > to obtain an advantage or benefit The entertainment you get from the product is a form of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) you are stretching the term to meaninglessness permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago I'm using an official definition of the word permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) To profit > to obtain an advantage or benefit The entertainment you get from the product is a form of profit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) you are stretching the term to meaninglessness permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago I'm using an official definition of the word permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) you are stretching the term to meaninglessness permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago I'm using an official definition of the word permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago I'm using an official definition of the word permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) no one made them produce the game. they could have chosen not to do that, and there would be no consequences at all. it's not slavery. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Then no one should buy anything until we reach a point where no one produces anything because there's no incentive to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) this sentence makes me suspect English is not your first language because it makes no sense. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago How? I mean, by your logic why should people buy anything instead of just copying/stealing it? No one gets hurt if we do so, you said so yourself! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Then no one should buy anything until we reach a point where no one produces anything because there's no incentive to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) this sentence makes me suspect English is not your first language because it makes no sense. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago How? I mean, by your logic why should people buy anything instead of just copying/stealing it? No one gets hurt if we do so, you said so yourself! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) this sentence makes me suspect English is not your first language because it makes no sense. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago How? I mean, by your logic why should people buy anything instead of just copying/stealing it? No one gets hurt if we do so, you said so yourself! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago How? I mean, by your logic why should people buy anything instead of just copying/stealing it? No one gets hurt if we do so, you said so yourself! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone tells you about the biggest play of the Superbowl, are they enslaving the NFL owners? get real. sharing stories, songs, tools, and skills is a basic human activity. it's not immoral. trying to prevent it is immoral. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) You can share stories of when you played a game, it doesn't mean you can copy the game itself so you still have access to it and someone else does too without any compensation going to the creator. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone wants to share a game with me, I am doing nothing wrong by accepting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago That logic only works if you ignore the fact that someone had to put work into creating the game. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) You can share stories of when you played a game, it doesn't mean you can copy the game itself so you still have access to it and someone else does too without any compensation going to the creator. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone wants to share a game with me, I am doing nothing wrong by accepting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago That logic only works if you ignore the fact that someone had to put work into creating the game. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) if someone wants to share a game with me, I am doing nothing wrong by accepting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago That logic only works if you ignore the fact that someone had to put work into creating the game. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago That logic only works if you ignore the fact that someone had to put work into creating the game. permalink fedilink source parent
