Is Piracy A Sin?

  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Wyróżnienie
Answer from /r/Catholicism.
1726947820034.png

TLDR: Copyright itself isn't a Christian concept. IMO copyright law is retarded and also could (is, especially with globalhomo companies) be connected to greed, degeneracy and money-hoarding.
 
If you weren't going to buy it anyway, then no, since nothing you do effects the rights holder at that point, but uploading it for anybody to use may be.
 
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Appropriation is appreciation.

And -

He who smelled it, delt it.
 
No because it's not actually theft, theft implies depriving one's use of their own property. So called "piracy" is merely the copying and sharing of files, and files cannot be "stolen" but copied, it could not possibly deprive the original of the ability to use it, thus not making it theft.

Since computer files are not a scarce good but one that is infinitely abundant, it cannot be stolen, only copied, and copying is not theft as it does not deprive the original owner of using their goods.
 
Piracy is not theft. It's the logical result of failing to deliver a service to your customer's satisfaction.

I wanted to watch an older movie awhile back. I could only find it on a streaming service I won't name but which has the reputation of being crappy and riddled with ads. I was willing to watch the ads because I knew that streaming services needed to keep the lights on. The movie started. After every single scene there were five ads. Five. I continued to watch because I was too lazy to stop and do something else and hey, at least they waited until after the scenes were done to play the ads. Then the streaming service crashed. I got it to work again, but the movie I was watching had been skipped ahead 20 minutes and I couldn't get the player to go back and play the part that I had missed. Frustrated, I shut off the TV, then asked one of my friends if they could find a copy of the movie I needed. They eventually did, and gave it to me. So now I had a crisp, uncut, digital version of the movie I wanted to watch, uninterrupted with ads. I was willing to pay the price that the IP owners wanted. I was willing to watch their ads, as odious and intrusive as they were, and they failed to cross the low bar of delivering me a complete showing of the movie.

I understand movies need to make money and I'd be happy to support a work of media that I like. I'd be happy to watch ads, if they were reasonable in duration and number. But greedy companies want to charge me more than I can afford for movies that aren't that new or not that famous, even. They act as though people don't have alternatives to their offers. A work of art or entertainment is only worth what one is willing to pay for it. Otherwise, it sits unsold and is worth nothing. Until IP owners find a reliable way to stop their media from getting copied and distributed, this is just how things are going to be.
 
smegma enthusiast powiedział(a):
Answer from /r/Catholicism.
Wyświetl załącznik 6440357
TLDR: Copyright itself isn't a Christian concept. IMO copyright law is retarded and also could (is, especially with globalhomo companies) be connected to greed, degeneracy and money-hoarding.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
I would mostly agree with this take but I would add an additional point that, IMO, leaves the matter settled.

But first of all lets clarify that those who did the work to make the product, say a film, are almost always compensated prior to release. This is especially true for older films where in many cases the people involved are deceased and the only one profiting is the rights holder which is typically some large conglomerate organization. Additionally these groups often charge an prohibitively excessive amount to access their media, or deny any "legal" means of accessing it at all.

So what would I add? The fact that Hollywood as a whole, and especially copyright conglomerates, are immoral institutions. Money given to them is inevitably used for nefarious purposes. To me that means if you choose to watch their media, you have a moral imperative to pirate it and deny them money.

Now if you really want to get hardcore about it, the most morally sound answer is to simply not consume their media, thus avoiding the moral quandaries of either piracy or giving them money. However that is also a very boring answer and one that most people would have a hard time abiding by. Not everyone is cut out for a monastic approach.
 
Wyróżnienie
Musisz się zalogować lub zarejestrować, aby odpowiedzieć.
Wstecz
Top Na dole