He fell for the stealing 1's and 0's meme

>he fell for the stealing 1's and 0's meme
Daily reminder that "piracy" isn't a "real" "crime."

Other urls found in this thread:

gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Piracy
youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4
youtube.com/watch?v=Yy45qY9c49k
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>judge I didn't kill that man, I just altered his molecule composition.

>making a copy
>altering the original
okay MPAA

what's the problem now?

just don't let anyone know you have said 1s and 0s also known as keep it to yourself and don't profit off whatever it is that you did

>certain arrangements of illuminated cells on an LCD are illegal
>certain arrangements of fundamental particles are illegal
>certain arrangements of electromagnetic radiation are illegal
>certain combinations of vibrations passing through a medium which are then converted by auditory nerves into electrochemical impulses in the brain are illegal

aaaand filtered

That's why I don't listen legal advice from IT pros and from Sup Forums

piracy isn't theft QUID PRO QUO &c

>>>That's why I don't listen legal advice from IT pros and from Sup Forums
>laws made by government
>legitimate
lel okay boss

this
everything should be legal to download
if it means television/game/whatever companies go bankrupt then its even better because only those who worked in those fields because they loved what they did will keep producing content

>implying anyone will do it for free
>implying production studios wouldn't just close the analog hole via longer theatrical releases and strict anti-electronics enforcement on premises

I buy all of my shit because I have a lot of money and can afford to do so, also prefer to know that the software works and can be updated. I'm not going to judge you for pirating shit but you cannot pretend that it isn't a "crime", it is a "crime" according to the law. Also, it is easy to see how it's objectively wrong on a contractual basis if the creator or owner of the software explicitly says "do not pirate this, you don't get to use this unless you pay for it".

In the grand scheme it is a very minor wrong to pirate something, but it is still wrong and you shouldn't be in denial about it.

I said that to myself once, but even drawings, music or anything else could have values.

I think that he's being sarcastic, user.

>he thinks he can own a specific pattern of charges on a capacitor
lel

Everything needs to be free
No more degenerates!

It is not a crime if i randomly generated each byte.

>certain sequences of motor neuron firings are illegal

but why?

Reminder that copyright infringement is not "piracy".
gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Piracy

Correct.

Obviously ownership/property is for the most part a concept invented by humans, but it is a concept central to society. It is ridiculous to say that somebody can't call things theirs especially when that somebody is the originator behind those things.

Your counterargument is reductionist and ignores the human aspect of ownership.

With all of the layers of emergence at play in a complex system, it would never happen.

So do you own the letters of those sentences you just wrote? The words? The phrases? At what point does it become IP? Keep your thoughts to yourself if you don't want people using them.

Here's the answer: never.

>it would never happen.
It did happen.

This.
People don't stop creating Movies and Music and art, just because people download it for free.

Art has nothing to do with money.

So catchy.
youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4

"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property." ~Thomas Jefferson

That's a strange line to take, I do "own" my words insomuch as I am held accountable for them outside of an anonymous forum... that's the basis of reputation, defamation law, works cited and all other sorts of things related to one's "person".

I get what you're saying that a sentence is a sentence, but not entirely true because we feel the need to attribute things to people when the things are valuable. The basis of this need is somewhat of a golden rule type of thing: if one of us contributed something valuable to the world, we feel like we'd deserve credit for it.

Btw, a sentence is probably a weaker case than a piece of software if the sentence isn't some important scientific discovery. I'm not sure that there is an equivalency here.

>Daily reminder that "piracy" isn't a "real" "crime."

Funny thing piracy is only a crime in my country if you profit from it.

Pretty sure piracy is a crime in your country
but you're thinking of copyright infringement.
See:

>Pretty sure piracy is a crime in your country
Yes, only if you profit from it.

>Yes, only if you profit from it.
Piracy is violently attacking ship on the high seas.
It has nothing to do with copyright infringement.

>Piracy is violently attacking ship on the high seas
Yes but it's only a crime if you profit from it.

What? A poor pirate is not a pirate at all!

>being this dense
as long as developers cant 100% prove that piracy hurts their income, they dont even have a moral ground to stand on.

say that piracy was magically impossible. do you honestly believe people like me would suddenly start buying movies, show subscriptions, and shitty games? remember there are LITERALLY hundreds of millions people like me - in china, eastern europe, latin america, and the middle east.

the people who will actually start buying stuff are a very small amount concentrated in the western world. that amount is negligable and wont improve their huge incomes by anything.

>as long as developers cant 100% prove that piracy hurts their income
Pretty sure getting violently attacked on a ship hurts anyone.
Are you confusing piracy with copyright infringement again?
gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Piracy

Oblibatory
youtube.com/watch?v=Yy45qY9c49k

>is ilegitimate
>because my anus said so
Thanks for proving my point bro.

Do you fucking understand the concept of homonyms?

>he fell for the stealing arrangements of molecules meme
Daily reminder that that "theft" isn't a "real" "crime.

If they don't want people to download stuff for free, they shouldn't put it on the internet in the first place.

Actually committing an act of piracy will inevitably fall under other crimes (murder, assault with a deadly weapon, destruction of property), even if you don't profit from it.

Reminder that if file sharing hurts your profits, that doesn't mean it's stealing, it means it's competition. A store that opens nearby another store and competes, driving profit away, isn't stealing. Git gud and stop whining.

Reminder that file sharing isn't a crime, it's just unlawful. Which means it can get you in a civil lawsuit, but not a criminal one. That law is wrong and copyright should be ditched completely.

Private property is theft.

The link user posted above explains that "piracy" is not a good term to use to refer to copyright infringement.

> Publishers often refer to copying they don't approve of as “piracy.” In this way, they imply that it is ethically equivalent to attacking ships on the high seas, kidnapping and murdering the people on them. Based on such propaganda, they have procured laws in most of the world to forbid copying in most (or sometimes all) circumstances. (They are still pressuring to make these prohibitions more complete.)

> If you don't believe that copying not approved by the publisher is just like kidnapping and murder, you might prefer not to use the word “piracy” to describe it. Neutral terms such as “unauthorized copying” (or “prohibited copying” for the situation where it is illegal) are available for use instead. Some of us might even prefer to use a positive term such as “sharing information with your neighbor.”

> A US judge, presiding over a trial for copyright infringement, recognized that “piracy” and “theft” are smear words.

piracy is a crime, but it's not stealing in the traditional sense. it's just making an unauthorized copy

it being a crime isn't going to stop me from doing it, though