Just read an awesome short story in my english class today.

[davann]

The only option is to make it VERY clear that people who "Pirate" or whatever are deriving value from the product of someone else's labor without exchanging something in return.

Is watching broadcast TV immoral?  Is sitting in the shade of a tall building (off the property) to escape the heat immoral?  Is nibbling on the core of an apple that someone bought, ate, and discarded immoral?  Is eating a free sample at the grocery store immoral?  Are the homeless people at the shelter I volunteer for (do free work for) immoral?  And here's one that ought to be considered for further discussion-- Is letting impoverished people pick up discarded bottles and cans, cleaning your property for free, immoral?  (cans you would have just thrown away)

Deriving value from someone's labor without exchanging something happens constantly.  Burden of proof, man.  If you want to make a moral argument, you need more than that.

Mere excuses for theft.

Edit:

Bad rationalizing for the desire to steal.

Theft is wrong it does not matter what fancy words or fancy rationalizing Dalebert uses, it is still wrong. It will even be wrong when a majority of people vote in agreement that it is not. Theft is theft.

[Cognitive Dissident]

The only option is to make it VERY clear that people who "Pirate" or whatever are deriving value from the product of someone else's labor without exchanging something in return.

Is watching broadcast TV immoral?  Is sitting in the shade of a tall building (off the property) to escape the heat immoral?  Is nibbling on the core of an apple that someone bought, ate, and discarded immoral?  Is eating a free sample at the grocery store immoral?  Are the homeless people at the shelter I volunteer for (do free work for) immoral?  And here's one that ought to be considered for further discussion-- Is letting impoverished people pick up discarded bottles and cans, cleaning your property for free, immoral?  (cans you would have just thrown away)

Deriving value from someone's labor without exchanging something happens constantly.  Burden of proof, man.  If you want to make a moral argument, you need more than that.

Mere excuses for theft.

Mere excuse for arbitrary abusive monopoly governments actions.

[Bill Brasky]

Theres no such thing as bad publicity, except for the publicity you generate by criminalizing your fanbase.  

[John Shaw]

Is watching broadcast TV immoral?

The terms of television shows are that you watch the commercials.

Hmm.  I don't remember signing that contract.  I don't feel obligated to, and usually don't.  I deliberately skip them using my DVR.  I must be acting immorally.  

DID I FUCKING SAY THAT YA FUCKING JACKASS?!?!

Debating the methods of distribution that an antiquated technology uses is irrelevant. I wasn't using *TERMS* in the goddamned legal sense. IF YOU FLICK A FUCKING TELEVISION ON, AND WATCH IT, THERE ARE COMMERCIALS. What you choose to do after it hits your cable/antenna isn't the point I was making.

Also, you are trying to evade the issue.

[John Shaw]

Theres no such thing as bad publicity, except for the publicity you generate by criminalizing your fanbase.  

I am not doing that. I am not supporting laws. I am not supporting anyone doing anything.

I'm not even saying what my own goddamned choices are in relation to distributing my own fucking shit. My stuff will be distributed in a way that *May* satisfuckingfy the cheap fuckers and still make me a buck.

Too many fucking conclusions being drawn from what I'm saying.

I AM SAYING: If someone makes something, and they say "Here is my art, these are my terms." then if you respect their art then you should respect their terms.

I don't understand why this is so fucking controversial.

[hellbilly]

Theres no such thing as bad publicity, except for the publicity you generate by criminalizing your fanbase.  

I am not doing that. I am not supporting laws. I am not supporting anyone doing anything.

I'm not even saying what my own goddamned choices are in relation to distributing my own fucking shit. My stuff will be distributed in a way that *May* satisfuckingfy the cheap fuckers and still make me a buck.

Too many fucking conclusions being drawn from what I'm saying.

I AM SAYING: If someone makes something, and they say "Here is my art, these are my terms." then if you respect their art then you should respect their terms.

I don't understand why this is so fucking controversial.

I didn't read Drifter's comment as being aimed at you & I agree with your point of view.

[John Shaw]

Theres no such thing as bad publicity, except for the publicity you generate by criminalizing your fanbase.  

I am not doing that. I am not supporting laws. I am not supporting anyone doing anything.

I'm not even saying what my own goddamned choices are in relation to distributing my own fucking shit. My stuff will be distributed in a way that *May* satisfuckingfy the cheap fuckers and still make me a buck.

Too many fucking conclusions being drawn from what I'm saying.

I AM SAYING: If someone makes something, and they say "Here is my art, these are my terms." then if you respect their art then you should respect their terms.

I don't understand why this is so fucking controversial.

I didn't read Drifter's comment as being aimed at you & I agree with your point of view.

Sorry, D.

I can't believe how fucking angry this topic makes me.* I have to step back for a while.

Just to be clear, my original complaint at Dale I'm taking back, because he offered a "buy it" solution and I didn't realize it.

The rest of my rage is separate from that. Hope that's clear. I consider Dale a friend and I think he's a great guy.



*I am actually red faced right now and can hear blood moving through my ears.

[Bill Brasky]

Theres no such thing as bad publicity, except for the publicity you generate by criminalizing your fanbase.  

I am not doing that. I am not supporting laws. I am not supporting anyone doing anything.

I'm not even saying what my own goddamned choices are in relation to distributing my own fucking shit. My stuff will be distributed in a way that *May* satisfuckingfy the cheap fuckers and still make me a buck.

Too many fucking conclusions being drawn from what I'm saying.

I AM SAYING: If someone makes something, and they say "Here is my art, these are my terms." then if you respect their art then you should respect their terms.

I don't understand why this is so fucking controversial.

I never said you were. 

I was just offering my edict from the papal window, to my flock.  Y'know.  Pontificating. 

Carry on.

[John Shaw]

I never said you were. 

I was just offering my edict from the papal window, to my flock.  Y'know.  Pontificating. 

Carry on.

Double apologies. I'm wound up like a fucking cobra's tit right now for some reason. Prolly due to STRESS.

[Bill Brasky]

I never said you were. 

I was just offering my edict from the papal window, to my flock.  Y'know.  Pontificating. 

Carry on.

Double apologies. I'm wound up like a fucking cobra's tit right now for some reason. Prolly due to STRESS.

Its okay, man. 

I've got the elections on.  Television.  Not worth pirating. 

[dalebert]

...deriving value from the product of someone else's labor without exchanging something in return.

...it is a moral argument

I gave a list of examples right off the top of my head that fit this statement, clearly demonstrating that someone benefiting from your labor does not necessarily equate to you being harmed.  That's the point.  The burden of proof for some violation of morality for the case you describe remains unsatisfied.  You say it's "obviously" different but you can't specify how it's different in a way that demonstrates harm to the creator.

You've implied before that such behavior may be rude, a claim with a much lighter burden of proof certainly than "immoral", but I disagree even with that claim.

I didn't want to see 2081 badly enough to pay $12 for it.  If it were feature-length, I probably would have wanted to own the DVD for my collection.  At 24 mins, I wouldn't even bother to go to the trouble to burn a copy to disk, much less pay $12 to own it.  Even when I watch a feature-length movie for free (Netflix, movie night, etc.), I often buy the DVD for my collection if I like it enough and can find it for a reasonable price.  I saw someone elses horrible quality "pirate" version of the latest Star Trek (video cam in the theater) but I liked it enough that it put me on the lookout for the official DVD at a reasonable price so I could watch it whenever the mood hits me and in much better quality.  Sure enough, I bought it.

Let's say for argument sake that creators somehow have complete control over who gets to enjoy their films.  Knowing that I will not pay the price they want, would they choose for me to not see it at all?  That means if someone asks me about it, instead of saying it was good and had some great libertarian themes, I'll just say I haven't seen it.  All I have to convey about the film is that I didn't value it enough to pay for it which isn't a great selling point to anyone who knows me and values my opinion, and they asked for it, after all.

Pirating Wide scale free proliferation increases profits for the creators of content.  An artist who wants people to do without even at the cost of harm to himself is being vindictive and irrational.  It's simply a bad business model, even if it were possible to control such proliferation (it's not, and it's just going to get harder).  Such an attitude shrinks the proverbial resource pie.  It's an irrational claim that it's immoral for someone to gain value while causing no harm whatsoever to anyone.  This is deep-seated programmed thinking that has no logical foundation.  Don't cop out and claim it's obvious.  If it's logical, prove it.

[Cognitive Dissident]

Is watching broadcast TV immoral?

The terms of television shows are that you watch the commercials.

Hmm.  I don't remember signing that contract.  I don't feel obligated to, and usually don't.  I deliberately skip them using my DVR.  I must be acting immorally.  

DID I FUCKING SAY THAT YA FUCKING JACKASS?!?!

Debating the methods of distribution that an antiquated technology uses is irrelevant. I wasn't using *TERMS* in the goddamned legal sense. IF YOU FLICK A FUCKING TELEVISION ON, AND WATCH IT, THERE ARE COMMERCIALS. What you choose to do after it hits your cable/antenna isn't the point I was making.

Also, you are trying to evade the issue.

I think that's the way a normal fucking human being reads it.