• Refurbished Refurbisher
    link
    fedilink
    13
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    How are you stealing income if there was no intention to pay the company to begin with? Even if there was an intention to buy it, companies aren’t entitled to consumers’ money. This is especially the case if the consumer has previously purchased a license to consume the product, and then the company decides to take (or steal) it away. No moral qualms with pirating the same content then.

    It’s digital data; you’re copying something, leaving the original completely intact. It’s not like a physical BluRay, where if you steal it from a store, you are making that store lose money due to that physical stock being stolen.

    And lastly, how is the company not stealing from consumers when they pull shit like this?

    • @helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      -5
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      How are you stealing income if there was no intention to pay the company to begin with?

      Theft does not imply the intention to pay, that’s kinda the whole point.

      Even if there was an intention to buy it, companies aren’t entitled to consumers’ money.

      They are if you take something they created.

      It’s digital data; you’re copying something, leaving the original completely intact.

      I don’t understand what that has to do with anything. You’re copying something someone else created, for the express purpose of generating income, without their permission.

      I don’t know how these justifications can be described as anything other than “mental gymnastics” because they obviously make zero sense and personally benefit you.

      • Refurbished Refurbisher
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I don’t understand what that has to do with anything. You’re copying something someone else created, for the express purpose of generating income, without their permission.

        Who said anything about generating income off of pirated work?

        Theft does not imply the intention to pay, that’s kinda the whole point.

        The definition of theft according to MW: the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it

        If you do not deprive the original owner of the property (such as: copying), it is not definitionally theft. Legally speaking, it is considered copyright infringement.

        • @helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          17 months ago

          Who said anything about generating income off of pirated work?

          No one. The person who did the work did so with the intention of generating income.

          Legally speaking, it is considered copyright infringement.

          Does it really matter? What’s the important differentiation there?

      • Zoolander
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -97 months ago

        You hit the nail on the head. That’s why they’re downvoting and arguing. It personally benefits them to steal.

        I’ve said it several times here…I don’t care if people pirate stuff. There are a myriad of reasons to do so. My issue is with the dishonesty of pretending it’s not stealing. Keep doing it, I don’t care, but own up to what you’re doing and admit it’s stealing.

        It’s mental gymnastics because they need to be able to continue stealing but don’t want to feel bad about it.

    • Zoolander
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -87 months ago

      Even if there was an intention to buy it, companies aren’t entitled to consumers’ money.

      Then you’re not entitled to ingest the content being created by that “company” (doesn’t have to be a company, it could be a single artist or a small group of artists).

      Taking away licenses is wrong. I’m not disputing that. But that doesn’t magically make stealing something that actual people created right.