The morality of piracy

[Blade Runner]

Likewise, it's clearly moral to embezzle from governments and large corporations. It just stands to reason. Right? It's really no different than any other data.

Another attempt at analogy that isn't ... analogous. If you remove money from an entity that no longer has that as its bottom line, it is making a material change in its constitution and future operations. Again, we've dealt with that point.

We don't need to derail the thread but a good example of rule following foolishness, and this is my opinion, is acting like lying on expenses for your taxes submitted is some sort of immoral or unconscionable activity. I find that to be the funniest of all the ultimate suckers test. The group that literally spies on your and creates files, against our Constitution, reaping taxes for a system which is 38 trillion in debt, has a federal reserve printing money out of nothing, and people get worried about others quibbling over tax rates that are already confiscatory? It's funny in its essence, since it sorta proves we're all just weak (non revolutionary) slaves.

The term "piracy" itself was pushed by corpos to equiparate making something for yourself to violent pillage.

Exactly.

(((They))) play with evil, malicious intent and we play by "rules" and with kid gloves.

It's hard to deny any of this, so much of the modern US is clown world and against our own culture, founding, and certainly against Christianity. I see people giving that same advice of "taking it on the chin" and "obey your leaders" but I've pointed out why that's comical at best. We had holidays for our founders who wouldn't put up with any of that and here we are with parasites running the country, printing money and debasing our people, and we're supposed to be OK with it? lol

It was OK for the "greats" like Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Ben Franklin and the boys to tell King George to fuck off but we better not cause any problems or hurt anybody. LOL, I think we all know that the generations are just soft, used to comfort, pacifist and generally pussies if we're really being real.

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

It's hard to deny any of this, so much of the modern US is clown world and against our own culture, founding, and certainly against Christianity. I see people giving that same advice of "taking it on the chin" and "obey your leaders" but I've pointed out why that's comical at best. We had holidays for our founders who wouldn't put up with any of that and here we are with parasites running the country, printing money and debasing our people, and we're supposed to be OK with it? lol

You seem to struggle with category distinctions. This thread is about whether piracy is moral or not and there is no reason to believe it is. The only people who think it is are inventing their own morality on the spot. Copyright laws predate the United States. They are not some new invention by Jews to screw you over. Pirating media to watch movies, listen to music, and play video games is your idea of a modern American Revolution? That's your idea of "fighting back?"

 

[homersheineken]

You're arguing a different issue. No one is claiming that the publishing business is squeaky clean. It's well known that many artists have been screwed over. How that justifies you in also screwing them over is what we are arguing. What happens between a publisher and an artist, no matter how you slice it, does not result in you, a third party, being personally justified in pirating media. It's just another excuse to steal something you haven't paid for.

As for your personal case, sorry to hear about that.

You're right. I wasn't making a full argument, just replying to Scorpion's question about creators.

We're currently in a spiritual and moral war. As a vassal state, our true masters use the Media to promote degeneracy, glorification of gangs, racism, pedophilia, spread lies about diseases, white guilt, abortions (Whites only), violence (especially on Whites, e.g. Cincinnati), faggotry, transgenderism.

There is bascially a complete monopoly on information centralized in the big 5 media companies. They hate Whites and especially Cristians and use this power to destroy families and lives.

So it goes back to my original post in the thread.

Is denying the pedophile, gay and talmudic Hollywood money in this war immoral?

Starve the beast. It was only a small component on how the Media steal from creators. The central idea is much bigger. Bigger than just Media even, as it penetrates all of society to government, judges, USAIDs, corporate DEI, immigration, etc...

So, if instead of the filth they create now, I download LIttle House on the Prairie (is it even available? Are they suppressing certain episodes or seasons because of greed or this cultural war, like they do with other programs where availability is whimsical) for my family to watch, I'm not going to feel bad.

This is war. They drew first blood, not me.

 

[Blade Runner]

You seem to struggle with category distinctions. This thread is about whether piracy is moral or not and there is no reason to believe it is. The only people who think it is are inventing their own morality on the spot. Copyright laws predate the United States. They are not some new invention by Jews to screw you over. Pirating media to watch movies, listen to music, and play video games is your idea of a modern American Revolution? That's your idea of "fighting back?"

You prove our point here. You're fixated on tiny legalisms, like pharisees, without seeing the overall picture. The quotes by homer below demonstrate it very well. It's supremely ironic too, since you are a Christian man. Appealing to off topic considerations (claims of category distinctions) that do in fact support our overall idea is not meaningless, you just try to promote confusion since we have countered the arguments effectively; it is a canard.

I'm very clear in argument in language in all of my posts. I know what category error and much of philosophy is, and what it isn't. Until you all can counter the points we have made with concrete examples (ZERO of the analogies have held, I have explained all of that already, twice), don't blame us for not understanding, when it is actually you that are the ones that can't prove your point.

We're currently in a spiritual and moral war. As a vassal state, our true masters use the Media to promote degeneracy, glorification of gangs, racism, pedophilia, spread lies about diseases, white guilt, abortions (Whites only), violence (especially on Whites, e.g. Cincinnati), faggotry, transgenderism.

Yup.

There is bascially a complete monopoly on information centralized in the big 5 media companies. They hate Whites and especially Cristians and use this power to destroy families and lives.

But you better pay your taxes and you better not transgress some legalism with copy-able material.

Starve the beast. It was only a small component on how the Media steal from creators. The central idea is much bigger. Bigger than just Media even, as it penetrates all of society to government, judges, USAIDs, corporate DEI, immigration, etc...

That was my point, in general, with the tax example because it's so good in exploring just how sick Americans are, and how confused they have become under the ruling of other, parasite parties.

 

[FrancisK]

When I formulate my posts in The Destruction of Women thread I blast "I need a girl" by Puff Daddy and Usher.

Hahhha love it, part 2 is better though. I've burned it on a lot of CD's.....let me go pray for my sins...

 

[Sandalwood Peak]

This thread is about whether piracy is moral or not and there is no reason to believe it is. The only people who think it is are inventing their own morality on the spot.

Piracy is cheating the system. You're accessing something that was not made freely accessible by the source or the middle party. Most rules and policies are created for a reason. At the end of the day, it's "immoral" to break them. I highly doubt you're squeaky clean. That's a straw man.

We can easily imagine why people pirate things but since you want to be stickler the onus is on you to explain why we shouldn't. So far all I've read is something about not paying someone their righteous due. This is where it gets a little funny because piracy is usually music, film or sports. Not exactly a simple 2 pounds of corn. Like has been mentioned I don't understand how you're quantifying what is owed to be making that argument. If you don't know how much is owed how can you say it's owed? Some people pirate music but attend concerts. There are different ways to support people.

The second issue is you're complaining about a benign problem. Historically musicians struggled and if anything, their lot has improved in the age of piracy. Even gig musicians seem to do okay.

The third issue is you're opening up a can of worms with your argumentation. Am I supposed to make sure the lithium miners get their rightful due when I buy electronics?

The fourth problem is about the merit of your outrage. You're outraged and disheartened seeing media pirated, I on the other hand was pleasantly surprised. I don't use reddit anymore, but I've seen endless reddit posts about artistic attribution, linking to the proper source, accusations of plagiarism, and constant appeals and pledges to monetary support all manner of people. These people, liberals mostly, have shown fairly decent discernment and character in making sure we don't have your doomsday scenario where artists are not compensated for their work. Myself, I avoid pirating software and just use freeware instead because I too have discernment. It doesn't make me a good person, but it shows I'm not callous.

I also don't understand why you're correlating piracy with bootlegging, plagiarism or worse.

Anyhow, reminds of this scene.



How does this video make you feel?

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

Piracy is cheating the system. You're accessing something that was not made freely accessible by the source or the middle party. Most rules and policies are created for a reason. At the end of the day, it's "immoral" to break them. I highly doubt you're squeaky clean. That's a straw man.

I'm not squeaky clean. Before I knew what piracy was, I was doing it. Haven't done it ever since I started working as a teen. No need to.

The second issue is you're complaining about a benign problem. Historically musicians struggled and if anything, their lot has improved in the age of piracy. Even gig musicians seem to do okay.

They haven't improved because of piracy but despite it.

has been mentioned I don't understand how you're quantifying what is owed to be making that argument. If you don't know how much is owed how can you say it's owed?

You're asking me to give a specific answer without giving me a specific example, which is ridiculous. I already told you that every case is unique, but that it's up to us to apply God's Word to each of our cases.

The third issue is you're opening up a can of worms with your argumentation. Am I supposed to make sure the lithium miners get their rightful due when I buy electronics?

As long as you pay for the electronics you'll be using, you're still behaving morally and responsibly.

The fourth problem is about the merit of your outrage. You're outraged and disheartened seeing media pirated, I on the other hand was pleasantly surprised.

I was more irritated with the dishonest way you framed your post than the pirating you've done ( I don't know how much). Despite me explicitly saying that I don't think I'm a good person, you tried to paint me as someone who thinks I'm a good person because I don't believe in piracy.

 

[Shaquilleoatmeal]

You seem to struggle with category distinctions. This thread is about whether piracy is moral or not and there is no reason to believe it is. The only people who think it is are inventing their own morality on the spot. Copyright laws predate the United States. They are not some new invention by Jews to screw you over. Pirating media to watch movies, listen to music, and play video games is your idea of a modern American Revolution? That's your idea of "fighting back?"

So is using an adblocker immoral?

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

You prove our point here. You're fixated on tiny legalisms, like pharisees, without seeing the overall picture. The quotes by homer below demonstrate it very well. It's supremely ironic too, since you are a Christian man. Appealing to off topic considerations (claims of category distinctions) that do in fact support our overall idea is not meaningless, you just try to promote confusion since we have countered the arguments effectively; it is a canard.

How? Nothing I said proves your point. Everytime you use this cheap rhetorical tactic you make me laugh. And it's not legalistic to recognize when something is immoral and to refrain from it. What you have failed to demonstrate is how evil Jews justify you in stealing a movie to watch it. If I was not a Christian, I could see your point. Since I am a Christian, I believe I should act like one. This means a commitment to truth, responsibility, aversion to immorality, etc.

So is using an adblocker immoral?

No.

 

[Shaquilleoatmeal]

No.

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

The reason your computer comes installed with adblockers and they are not illegal is because you have a right "to control your own device and filter the content you choose to view, including ads."

It is not the same thing as circumventing access control and stealing content, for example.

 

[Shaquilleoatmeal]

The reason your computer comes installed with adblockers and they are not illegal is because you have a right "to control your own device and filter the content you choose to view, including ads."

It is not the same thing as circumventing access control and stealing content, for example.

But it’s still depriving people of their reward, no?

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

But it’s still depriving people of their reward, no?

He is getting his reward with adsense. Adsense is not a hard paywall nor is it meant to be. It's more like a hat that collects tips. If he wanted to, he could easily restrict access to his site and set up a hard paywall like a news site. At that point, it would be immoral to access his site without going through the paywall.

 

[Shaquilleoatmeal]

If he wanted to, he could easily restrict access to his site and set up a hard paywall like a news site. At that point, it would be immoral to access his site without going through the paywall.

Immoral, but is that illegal?

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

Immoral, but is that illegal?

Not sure about that one. Sometimes I see news articles I want to read, I click on the link, see that it's the New York Times wanting to charge me $9.99 a month to read the article, then I forget about it. If I somehow got access to that article, they could probably come down on me with legal precedent if they really wanted to.

 

[Острог]

This anti-piracy argumentation is a moot point. Radiohead put out their album for free and relied only on donations. It earned them money alright. Donation model is based on the premise that you like said art so much that you want to reward the artist. It also promotes good art because no one wants to support lousy artists. The industry model assures that low quality art gets paid even if the buyer is not satisfied with what they had to pay for to merely evaluate.

 

[Shaquilleoatmeal]

Not sure about that one. Sometimes I see news articles I want to read, I click on the link, see that it's the New York Times wanting to charge me $9.99 a month to read the article, then I forget about it. If I somehow got access to that article, they could probably come down on me with legal precedent if they really wanted to.

Ever heard of archive.ph? On that site all the articles are archived.

The reason is because it’s possible sometimes to read articles for free, but later a paywall will appear. If that news site didn’t allow free articles ever then the articles wouldn’t be available on the archive site.

 

[scorpion]

The idea that piracy is justifiable because you are sticking it to the man/the Jews/the corporations/Globohomo by refusing to pay for their content is bizarre and nonsensical. It obviously begs the question: if these people are such malign actors that you can justify stealing from them, why in the world are you consuming their content to begin with? You refuse to pay them to poison your mind, but are glad to do so for free?

This is the real answer to the question of piracy these days: if you aren't interested in a piece of content enough to pay for it, then you shouldn't pirate it. Instead of pirating a bunch of goy slop content, go find something else to do. No one's life ever got worse because they stopped playing video games and watching a lot of television.

 

[Thomas More]

Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-17 both clearly state that we should obey the law. Now I know some will say it's different now and the Bible doesn't apply in this case, because the corporations are bad, whereas Paul and Peter were talking about obeying the Romans.

However, I don't think this is a very good argument. The Jews and the Christians actually had a very bad opinion of the Romans. Probably at least as bad as what we might think of the makers of content we want to steal. If the early Christians were instructed to obey the law, surely those instructions apply to us too?

 

[Shaquilleoatmeal]

Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-17 both clearly state that we should obey the law. Now I know some will say it's different now and the Bible doesn't apply in this case, because the corporations are bad, whereas Paul and Peter were talking about obeying the Romans.

However, I don't think this is a very good argument. The Jews and the Christians actually had a very bad opinion of the Romans. Probably at least as bad as what we might think of the makers of content we want to steal. If the early Christians were instructed to obey the law, surely those instructions apply to us too?

Is using internet archive to access articles for free breaking the law?