Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Book Piracy as Peer Preservation

computationalculture.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 163 posts

Re: Book Piracy as Peer Preservation

#141

Post by Nelson69 »

bleachedsleet wrote: post #98
Nelson69 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, it's all virtual, you're not actually 'stealing' their money since you weren't actually going to pay for it anyways, but if we're pedantic about it you are depriving them their rights. As the owner, they can copyright it, they can specify the terms by which you're allowed to view it or not view it. They can decide to not let you view it. You are taking that right from them. You are saying your right to access t…

You are assuming that everyone agrees copyright is a good thing...

I make no such assumption, I'm just pointing out that it's the current framework that we have and that with it content creators are given actual rights and among those rights is the right to significant control over distribution and consumption of their content.

Re: Book Piracy as Peer Preservation

#142

Post by aninhumer »

rhino369 wrote: post #130
Ace17 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scarcity that physical property deals with isn't artificial.

I'd argue that the lack of scaricity makes owning a work of art less problematic. Someone can always make a new one. I was born into a world where every peace of land I could use to survive on is owned. But there are an unlimited number of songs or books that can be written. What's the harm in letting a person own the book they created. There are an unlimited number left.

That's not how it works. New ideas are scarce, in that they require effort (and ultimately energy) to create. There are not "an unlimited number left", someone has to actually create them.

However, ideas are not rivalrous. Once they are created, everyone in the world can benefit from them simultaneously at no additional cost. Therefore, the immediate opportunity cost of allowing people to own ideas is far greater than for physical property.

Re: Book Piracy as Peer Preservation

#143

Post by spdustin »

duozerk wrote: post #93
Nelson69 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, it's all virtual, you're not actually 'stealing' their money since you weren't actually going to pay for it anyways, but if we're pedantic about it you are depriving them their rights. As the owner, they can copyright it, they can specify the terms by which you're allowed to view it or not view it. They can decide to not let you view it. You are taking that right from them. You are saying your right to access t…

"You are saying your right to access the content is more important than their rights, it's pretty simple." Not exactly; I'm saying the benefits to society as a whole offered by the post-scarcity nature of data on the Internet (infinitely copiable with negligible cost) is so large that, in my opinion, their right to decide who should access the content is far less important and so should be ignored. It certainly sucks…

What about my case:

I run a software training company. We provide streaming access to recordings made of the live session for which a student purchased a seat. Pay for a four day class, and you can stream the recording of that four day class for, at the least, 18 months. Why 18 months? That's all we promise, ideas end up being available for longer - five years and counting now - and in 18 months the class tends to have changed enough that we'd rather you just attend again (for free, if it's online).

Do you have the right to pirate the videos that my students paid for? Do they have the right to share it with people who didn't attend the course, and are thus missing the context of the classroom experience (and the web site where updated materials/code samples are dispensed)?

Re: Book Piracy as Peer Preservation

#144

Post by vibrio »

rhino369 wrote: post #110
tdsamardzhiev wrote: post #5

There's a huge amount of books/music/movies/games that I have no means of obtaining legally. There's also tons of stuff I don't have convenient way to buy (e.g. no way I'm paying full HBO NOW subscription for watching a single TV show). We are 16 years into 21st century now, it's about time for big-name producers to stop calling people "thieves" and offer them an acceptable service instead.

HBO puts their shows on iTunes as one off downloads a couple months after premiere. If you aren't willing to wait that long you should be willing to pay full price to subscribe. HBO now is an acceptable service. One pirates demanded for years. The lack of which they used to justify piracy. And now I see pirates have now decided it's too much. Let's face it, your piracy is due to be cheap ass.

You've constructed a nice straw man. "pirates* demand for years" "pirates have decided" Pirates* and pirates are likely different groups.

Arrr, but ye shall remember...pirates will be pirates matey!!

Re: Book Piracy as Peer Preservation

#145

Post by coffeevradar »

duozerk wrote: post #93
Nelson69 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, it's all virtual, you're not actually 'stealing' their money since you weren't actually going to pay for it anyways, but if we're pedantic about it you are depriving them their rights. As the owner, they can copyright it, they can specify the terms by which you're allowed to view it or not view it. They can decide to not let you view it. You are taking that right from them. You are saying your right to access t…

"You are saying your right to access the content is more important than their rights, it's pretty simple." Not exactly; I'm saying the benefits to society as a whole offered by the post-scarcity nature of data on the Internet (infinitely copiable with negligible cost) is so large that, in my opinion, their right to decide who should access the content is far less important and so should be ignored. It certainly sucks…

Rationalizing your own behavior of downloading content you like and enjoying consuming it as being a "benefit to society" is quite a stretch.

Thinking that everything you do, even selfishly, is somehow ethically laudable is not a sign of maturity.

Re: Book Piracy as Peer Preservation

#146

Post by bleachedsleet »

Nelson69 wrote: post #141
bleachedsleet wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are assuming that everyone agrees copyright is a good thing...

I make no such assumption, I'm just pointing out that it's the current framework that we have and that with it content creators are given actual rights and among those rights is the right to significant control over distribution and consumption of their content.

You responded to a comment arguing that piracy could be considered a form of social protest. As such appealing to copyright seems a poor counter since copyright could be the very thing being protested.

It's anecdotal at this point but also worth noting that the earliest conception of copyright in the colonial era had nothing to do with protecting creators and everything to do with allowing distributors and regulators get a piece of the pie.

Re: Book Piracy as Peer Preservation

#147

Post by hrehhf »

te_chris wrote: post #29
tdsamardzhiev wrote: post #5

There's a huge amount of books/music/movies/games that I have no means of obtaining legally. There's also tons of stuff I don't have convenient way to buy (e.g. no way I'm paying full HBO NOW subscription for watching a single TV show). We are 16 years into 21st century now, it's about time for big-name producers to stop calling people "thieves" and offer them an acceptable service instead.

So you want an 'acceptable service', despite admitting you're not willing to pay for multitude available to you already (iTunes/Play/Amazon for one offs and then all the Sub ones for library access)?

If I would rather not be tracked and profiled by these companies, which service would you suggest? In the terms of service of iTunes, Play store, and Amazon it appears those three do track and profile users. Is it too much to ask? How much more would digital copies cost for the 'privilege' of not being tracked and profiled?

Re: Book Piracy as Peer Preservation

#148

Post by sctb »

6d6b73 wrote: post #54
kofejnik wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

watching/reading something without authorization is not theft; redefining the words to suit your cause feels no less wrong than 'pirating'

It's you who is trying to redefine the words to make theft acceptable.

Please stop posting unsubstantive comments. Discussions on HN are to be in the spirit of intellectual curiosity and not ideological warfare. Comments that predictably derail conversation ruin these threads for everyone.

Re: Book Piracy as Peer Preservation

#149

Post by aninhumer »

duozerk wrote: post #43
segmondy wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Listen, you have no right to someone's else own work. If you don't want to pay HBO NOW to watch a single TV show. No problem. If you do however pirate their show, then that's stealing and the owner has a right to call you a thief. If HBO decides to charge $1,000 per episode, that would be very outrageous, but that still doesn't give anyone the right to steal their show. BTW, I know the pain, I really want to watch Sh…

No, it isn't "stealing". You're not depriving them of the content, you're copying it. And you're not even depriving them of the price they charge to access that content, unless you would've bought it had it not been available through piracy. And that's I think really the exception, not the rule. I know I download a hell of a lot of movies, tv shows, etc. that I would definitely never watch if they were not available…

Do we have to do this song and dance every single time there's a discussion about copyright?

This is yet another example of a semantic argument as a proxy for values. What matters is not whether piracy "is theft", it's how bad we think it is. But by framing the argument as a semantic one, it ensures that people will focus on technicalities and constantly talk past each other, all the while ignoring what actually matters.

Agreeing to either definition of the word "theft" is not going to make either side suddenly change their opinion of piracy.

So can we all just agree that copying a file without consent and taking a physical object without consent are qualitatively different acts, and have a direct discussion of their relative morality instead?

Re: Book Piracy as Peer Preservation

#150

Post by imgabe »

seren wrote: post #61
imgabe wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The victim of identity theft is deprived of their credit rating, reputation, etc. Credit is a resource that gets used up as you use more of it or take out loans and don't pay them back. Making a copy of a digital file has no similar effect on the original owner of the file.

Even if, you leave the original in a pristine state, the fact that multiple copies are available and can be used (for good or nefarious purpose), dilutes or erodes the value of the original. And this is true for both digital content or something as intangible as an identity. So I am not really convinced by the simple argument that since the original still exists untouched, everything is fine. Yes, this is surely conv…

There are multiple copies of the Mona Lisa. Many, many millions of reproductions. Is the value of the original Mona Lisa diminished because of it?
Post reply on HN