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

Why I'm a Pirate

ploum.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 527 posts

Re: Why I'm a Pirate

#331

Post by dchest »

tjr wrote: post #307
dchest wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPL is about sharing the source code of the original or derivative work. Which is pretty honorable. Breaching the terms of GPL means refusing to share. Regarding your first point, yes, since we're speaking about ethics here, it's morally acceptable to disregard wishes of authors to restrict your freedom of handling copies of their published work, as long as doing this is good for people and makes no harm to authors.…

But the point, I believe, is that the concept of breaching the GPL is nonsensical if you do not respect the GPL or the copyright law on which it rests. Whether if you share something against its creator's will, or if you refuse to share something against its creator's will, in both cases you are ignoring the creator's wishes and violating copyright law.

Yes. But speaking in terms of morale, not laws, not sharing the source code for GPL software is morally wrong and dishonorable. Sharing it is morally right and honorable.

Re: Why I'm a Pirate

#332

Post by ThomPete »

txxxxd wrote: post #321
ThomPete wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true. Artist will always make art and always have.

Yes, of course individuals or small groups will still create art in their free time. You can't deny however that any massive undertakings would be effectively killed. No one will invest millions of dollars to produce a video game, or hundreds of millions to produce a movie if it can be freely copied. It's great that you can make a game or movie on a small budget, but isn't it better to live in a world where we can ha…

1. Games and movies still makes lots of money 2. Streaming technologies will render the need for physically storing games, movies or anything more and more obsolete. 3. Just wait til the movie houses start using 3d models in stead.

You see the problem is that you have to think about this in a much larger perpective to realize that things will even themselves out.

With regards to cost of copyright. Then yes when it makes people criminals to the extent it do today and fines them with amounts it do then it is way way way to high.

Re: Why I'm a Pirate

#333

Post by technoslut »

ThomPete wrote: post #258
technoslut wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm trying to understand your point. Are you for digital music being available or not? >Where is your sympathy for all the truckers, records store people etc. that lost their jobs because of digitalization? Of course I do have sympathy for them but humanity has to move forward. We are living in a disruptive age – much like those in the beginning of the Industrial Age. Humanity will need to adjust. This really is anot…

So basically what you are saying is that the truckers should get with the times but the artist shouldn't? We live as you say in a disruptive age and this applies in no small part to artists. As with regards to the starving artists. Let me remind you that the kind of artists that actually have spent many years becoming good have always been struggling and always needed to do live gigs. They are very different than tho…

>So basically what you are saying is that the truckers should get with the times but the artist shouldn't?

You're playing a game that has nobody's interests at hand.

Yes I'm saying this because 'truckers' are going to get left behind. You still haven't answered the question of whether we should live in the digital age or not.

>Let me remind you that the kind of artists that actually have spent many years becoming good have always been struggling and always needed to do live gigs.

You're playing a game against my argument. All artists struggle but do you want them to become eternally poor?

>Let me remind you that the kind of artists that actually have spent many years becoming good have always been struggling and always needed to do live gigs.

Do you or many know the difference? Are most making the distinction and buying indie products? I can already tell that they are not.

Re: Why I'm a Pirate

#334

Post by andylei »

Derbasti wrote: post #228
grellas wrote: post #212

Creative effort - or at at least any that is truly worthy of the name - takes tears, and sweat, and blood. We can marvel at the output of an artist, or a writer, or a composer, or a film maker and yet fail to focus on the years of toil that often preceded that work. And I am not here speaking of some isolated genius. I still remember the days when I was so dissatisfied with my lack of writing skills that I decided to…

The problem is not copyright itself. The problem is that the creators are not the copyright owners any more. This is a very subtle distinction. We should do all we can to help creators, not publishers. Publishers have their place in the distribution chain, but they should not be allowed to act as if they were the creators. If the publisher's business model is failing, so be it. Publishers and gatekeepers are not wort…

what are you suggesting? banning contracts for distribution agreements? what exactly is a law that makes "copyright an unalienable right"?

Re: Why I'm a Pirate

#335

Post by ThomPete »

sequoia wrote: post #329
ThomPete wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course not, that requires their physical presence and physical distribution. Very different.

Their "physical distribution" by means of a complex technological infrastructure involving microphones, amplifiers, speakers, lighting, electricity etc. etc., which, as you point out, "the artist didn't make," but which the artist wishes to leverage in order to make a greater profit. The argument of "well you didn't invent TCP/IP so you can't expect to make money distributing digital copies of your music" is the slip…

You keep confusing the two.

If I take an microphone from you, you don't have an microphone. If I copy a song from you, you still have the song yourself.

It might be that you don't see the difference but I do and therein is our disagreement.

Re: Why I'm a Pirate

#336

Post by Czarnian »

ThomPete wrote: post #317
gravitronic wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of me hopes that your vision becomes reality and all financially backed art falls apart.. just so you, ThomPete, can live in a world that shitty and know that this is what you wanted. Enjoy your cat videos.

Do you even know how much great great great music gets created without ever making a single dime.

Leaving aside the rather obvious question of what makes you think your taste in music is superior to anyone else, how much MORE of that great, great, great music would get created if the artists didn't have to wash dishes for 10 hours a day to make rent and eat?

Every hour you have to spend working a day job is an hour you can't spend creating.

Re: Why I'm a Pirate

#337

Post by nkassis »

ThomPete wrote: post #311
sequoia wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I suppose charging for a concert makes them a filthy businessman as well. Should I get to choose whether or not I must pay to see them play live?

Of course not, that requires their physical presence and physical distribution. Very different.

And in most cases you pay for a unique concert, sure it's the same songs as the last show but musicians rarely play the music exactly the same way. The best concert include a lot more than just playing the songs. It's worth paying for. The best concert artist put on an act and improvise on stage. It's not easy and it takes talent and work.

Re: Why I'm a Pirate

#338

Post by eropple »

burgerbrain wrote: post #309
dhimes wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would the business model be in this case?

Use your imagination.

Spoken like somebody who doesn't have an answer. It's okay to admit that. But given that you generally seem more interested in calling people "insane" and telling people to go fuck themselves[1] than having an honest conversation, I am unsurprised at your behavior.

[1] - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3468027

-

Work-for-hire is a concept that, sure, can work in some cases. It does not solve the problem of the development of significant, large-scale creative works--and making it economically viable to do so. As I've said elsewhere in this comment tree, I find it extremely unlikely that one will fund a Half-Life or a Skyrim through Kickstarter. Can you honestly and with good faith say that you consider it more reasonably feasible for projects to raise multiple millions of dollars on a Kickstarter-esque platform than for private investiture to take the risk of profitability on such a project?

You tell us to "use our imagination" to defend your argument for you. I reject this: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and while I don't expect that you have extraordinary evidence, more than handwaving would be nice. How are large-scale creative works made economically feasible to produce in this utopic world without copyright? To the best of my knowledge, even open-source game projects have never managed this. You can bring up a Wesnoth or something, but the coherence of the game experience is poor at best and for the most part these games simply fail to credibly measure up to the focused, designed experiences of the aforementioned commercial titles. The argument of "settle for Wesnoths" doesn't ring true to me.

Were I to assume bad faith, as you so regularly seem to do (really, you're among the more abusive regular posters here, I'm kind of surprised you get away with it), I would charge that you lack respect for creatives and seem content for them to subsist off the inconsistently extant angels of consumers' better natures. But instead I would rather assume good faith and expect you to have some sort of insight into this world that you imply would be superior. So, put up or shut up.

Re: Why I'm a Pirate

#339

Post by sequoia »

fabjan wrote: post #314
sequoia wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me first state that I'm in basically total agreement with OP and mostly agree with parent, but one point sticks in my craw: >> The point is that this is my decision. >Granting the creator such rights takes them away from everyone else. Why is that justified? Why should one person, the creator, be able to tell other people what they can and cannot do? http://thegatheringplacehome.myfastforum.org/archive/life-le...…

So the hen should control what the cow does with any bread the hen chooses to give the cow?

No, the cow should- the cow is like the pirate- the cow should, I mean the hen should- let me back up for a minute: the mill is like the DNS system, and the oven is like RIAA, so the hen should be able to give bread to the co- shoot, now I'm all confused.

Re: Why I'm a Pirate

#340

Post by angersock »

txxxxd wrote: post #328
angersock wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it that the folks defending copyright always pull out the "But then creators will take their balls and go home!" card? That's such a repugnant, faithless argument. Numerous examples exist of people creating in spite of the system--and even making a living doing the same! So, the entire issue for indie developers (of whose ranks I count myself a member) can be solved by not making a product until you confirm th…

> "Why is it that the folks defending copyright always pull out the "But then creators will take their balls and go home!" card? That's such a repugnant, faithless argument. Numerous examples exist of people creating in spite of the system--and even making a living doing the same!" Your logic is faulty - just because some people will continue to create in spite of the system does not mean all can continue to. Yes, in…

If the market evolves to not sustain AAA games, thems the breaks.

I'm not following this argument. Both Wolfire and Mojang (Notch's company) sell games. They also provide free demos but their primary income comes from selling copyrighted works, not donations.

So, to a point, they are effectively living off "donations" until they ship 1.0, right? Preorders are effectively donations to continue development.

Post reply on HN