Piracy is necessary and doesn't hurt revenues

AlexBell · 07-10-2014, 10:59 PM

This is mainly about films, but may apply to ebooks also.

http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...es?CMP=ema_632

HarryT · 07-10-2014, 11:16 PM

A very peculiar definition of "necessary". She claims that it is "necessary" to pirate TV shows because geographical restrictions prevent her from watching them legally when living in another country, but that suggests some sort of inherent "right" to be able to see a TV show. What law grants her that right, I wonder?

Dulin's Books · 07-11-2014, 12:04 AM

ridiculous article.

fjtorres · 07-11-2014, 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

A very peculiar definition of "necessary". She claims that it is "necessary" to pirate TV shows because geographical restrictions prevent her from watching them legally when living in another country, but that suggests some sort of inherent "right" to be able to see a TV show. What law grants her that right, I wonder?

The law of being entitled to whatever catches your fancy?
Entitlement culture at its finest.
If internet access is a human right, why not GAME OF THRONES?
Or DC Comics?
Or Pandora?

EowynCarter · 07-11-2014, 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

A very peculiar definition of "necessary". She claims that it is "necessary" to pirate TV shows because geographical restrictions prevent her from watching them legally when living in another country, but that suggests some sort of inherent "right" to be able to see a TV show. What law grants her that right, I wonder?

I did pirate game of thrones, i want to watch it, no legal way was available to me.
Now, I can have OCS, so i took OSC and voila.

They should relay wake up, and realize that if they want people to pay for their products, they have to begin with making said product available.

When in Denmark, I face the " not available in your country". I wanted to watch heroes, but TFI video denied me, because I was in Denmark. Danish alternative (if there where some), where in danish i don't really speak..

So as a last resort, I went to the darknet.

Steam was a pain too, not wanting to let me pay with my french visa while using a danish IP.

Fist time, I called support, second time, i gave up buying the game.

Geo-restrictions are bad, geo restrictions as an expatriate, that's

.

HarryT · 07-11-2014, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

I did pirate game of thrones, i want to watch it, no legal way was available to me.
Now, I can have OCS, so i took OSC and voila.

They should relay wake up, and realize that if they want people to pay for their products, they have to begin with making said product available.

But isn't that a perfect example of the "culture of entitlement" that fjtorres refers to in his previous post? Why do you believe that you have some sort of "right" to watch it?

EowynCarter · 07-11-2014, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

But isn't that a perfect example of the "culture of entitlement" that fjtorres refers to in his previous post? Why do you believe that you have some sort of "right" to watch it?

"Right", nope.

But as no legal way is available, it changes nothing for the people how made the show. No harm done, really.

HarryT · 07-11-2014, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

"Right", nope.

But as no legal way is available, it changes nothing for the people how made the show. No harm done, really.

That's the viewpoint that the quoted article takes, but it's one that I strongly disagree with, I'm afraid.

pwalker8 · 07-11-2014, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

A very peculiar definition of "necessary". She claims that it is "necessary" to pirate TV shows because geographical restrictions prevent her from watching them legally when living in another country, but that suggests some sort of inherent "right" to be able to see a TV show. What law grants her that right, I wonder?

To a great extent, I sympathize with her. If she can legally purchase a show in Germany, why should she not be able to watch that show where ever she is? It depends on if you think that when you purchase something, then you are only purchasing a limited license to that. or whither or not you now own it. When I purchase a book or DVD in the US, it's not confiscated at the border if I try to carry it with me in order to watch it or read it on vacation. Geographic restrictions is very much an antiquated business model.

Of course, it depends on your definition of piracy. If I understand what she is trying to do, i.e. watch programs that are available for free in Germany, then I don't consider that piracy. Nor do I consider it piracy to have Amazon accounts in Germany when you live in the US. Watching Game of Thrones is probably piracy since it's not legally available for free, but that isn't what the article describes.

I also agree that the entertainment industry greatly over exaggerates the cost of piracy.

mbovenka · 07-11-2014, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's the viewpoint that the quoted article takes, but it's one that I strongly disagree with, I'm afraid.

On moral grounds, sure. On practical grounds, not so much. If I *can't* buy something, there is no way my pirating can cost the legal owner any missed income (assuming we're talking about bits and not actual physical goods).

This changes, of course, as soon there is a legal way for me to buy it, but the example of someone who actually can't buy an item copying it illegally is as close to a victimless crime as I can think of.

But that's

HarryT · 07-11-2014, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbovenka

On moral grounds, sure. On practical grounds, not so much. If I *can't* buy something, there is no way my pirating can cost the legal owner any missed income (assuming we're talking about bits and not actual physical goods).

Saying "piracy is necessary", though, clearly implies that someone has a "need" to watch a TV show. That's what I can't agree with: nobody "needs" to watch a particular TV show. Merely "wanting" to watch it doesn't give the right to simply take it (IMHO, of course).

fjtorres · 07-11-2014, 08:06 AM

Wants and needs are different things.
Conflating the two is very bad decision making. Very few if any digital content products are true needs; most are merely "wants". Pretending otherwise is just rationalization for "I wanna, I wanna, I wanna".

By now it is probably too late to re-train the current generation but perhaps something can be done for the next:

http://www.empoweringparents.com/I-W...t-in-Kids.php#

EowynCarter · 07-11-2014, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

Saying "piracy is necessary", though, clearly implies that someone has a "need" to watch a TV show. That's what I can't agree with: nobody "needs" to watch a particular TV show. Merely "wanting" to watch it doesn't give the right to simply take it (IMHO, of course).

I guess it's just you never found yourself in that situation.
Nah, in that situation, i don't have a moral problem with pirating.

I also pirated the harry potter books back then. Got them on potttermore day one when they became available though.

mbovenka · 07-11-2014, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

Saying "piracy is necessary", though, clearly implies that someone has a "need" to watch a TV show. That's what I can't agree with: nobody "needs" to watch a particular TV show. Merely "wanting" to watch it doesn't give the right to simply take it (IMHO, of course).

Indeed it doesn't. But only in a world of Platonic ideals would that be an absolute barrier. We do not live in such a world, and in practice such things are always weighed between perceived damages of the act to others, the strength of the want/'need' and the perception of the personal consequences of the act.

Only the physical laws of nature are truly absolute; all others are, in the end, only guidelines.

pwalker8 · 07-11-2014, 08:23 AM

Actually, piracy is necessary doesn't imply that some one has a "need" to watch a show. It implies that in some cases, piracy is necessary in order to watch that show. I don't think there is much controversial about that. As far as the difference between want and need, very little in this world is truly needed. You don't "need" to read books, eat a big, juicy steak, or watch TV. They are just things that people want, and that make those people's lives a bit more enjoyable. I'm sure you are not trying to argue that people shouldn't try to make their lives a little bit more enjoyable? The Declaration of Independence says that we have a right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This falls in the pursuit of happiness bucket.

07-10-2014, 10:59 PM	#1
AlexBell Wizard Posts: 3,413 Karma: 13369310 Join Date: May 2008 Location: Launceston, Tasmania Device: Sony PRS T3, Kobo Glo, Kindle Touch, iPad, Samsung SB 2 tablet	Piracy is necessary and doesn't hurt revenues This is mainly about films, but may apply to ebooks also. http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...es?CMP=ema_632

07-11-2014, 08:06 AM	#12
fjtorres Grand Sorcerer Posts: 11,732 Karma: 128354696 Join Date: May 2009 Location: 26 kly from Sgr A* Device: T100TA,PW2,PRS-T1,KT,FireHD 8.9,K2, PB360,BeBook One,Axim51v,TC1000	Wants and needs are different things. Conflating the two is very bad decision making. Very few if any digital content products are true needs; most are merely "wants". Pretending otherwise is just rationalization for "I wanna, I wanna, I wanna". By now it is probably too late to re-train the current generation but perhaps something can be done for the next: http://www.empoweringparents.com/I-W...t-in-Kids.php# Last edited by fjtorres; 07-11-2014 at 08:09 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Piracy Irony: Copyright firm fined after stealing music for anti-piracy ad.	spindlegirl	News	4	07-21-2012 06:41 AM
Anti-Piracy group wants to ban you from talking about piracy	Nate the great	News	39	06-06-2012 05:20 AM
IDPF Reports Wholesale US Ebook Revenues up 173%	Smashwords	News	3	04-03-2009 03:33 PM
PVI revenues drop - weakening e-paper orders!	Alexander Turcic	News	66	07-14-2008 04:05 PM
NY Times online division revenues are growing	Bob Russell	News	1	06-20-2006 05:26 AM

07-10-2014, 11:16 PM	#2
HarryT eBook Enthusiast Posts: 85,544 Karma: 93383099 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6	A very peculiar definition of "necessary". She claims that it is "necessary" to pirate TV shows because geographical restrictions prevent her from watching them legally when living in another country, but that suggests some sort of inherent "right" to be able to see a TV show. What law grants her that right, I wonder?

07-11-2014, 12:04 AM	#3
Dulin's Books Wizard Posts: 2,806 Karma: 13500000 Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Portland, OR Device: Boox PB360 etc etc etc	ridiculous article.

07-11-2014, 08:23 AM	#15
pwalker8 Grand Sorcerer Posts: 7,196 Karma: 70314280 Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Atlanta, GA Device: iPad Pro, iPad mini, Kobo Aura, Amazon paperwhite, Sony PRS-T2	Actually, piracy is necessary doesn't imply that some one has a "need" to watch a show. It implies that in some cases, piracy is necessary in order to watch that show. I don't think there is much controversial about that. As far as the difference between want and need, very little in this world is truly needed. You don't "need" to read books, eat a big, juicy steak, or watch TV. They are just things that people want, and that make those people's lives a bit more enjoyable. I'm sure you are not trying to argue that people shouldn't try to make their lives a little bit more enjoyable? The Declaration of Independence says that we have a right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This falls in the pursuit of happiness bucket.

Advert

Advert