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

The EU suppressed a 300-page study that found piracy doesn’t harm sales (2017)

gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 178 posts

Re: The EU suppressed a 300-page study that found piracy doesn’t harm sales (2017)

#101

Post by Matheus28 »

kmeisthax wrote: post #83
onepointsixC wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you be pleased if that applied to all of your work too? That immediately anyone can start taking your work and making money off of it? Copyright at least makes big players pay the original creators for the rights to the works. Netflix going ahead and making money off of subscribers while paying nothing to creators would be a significantly worse situation.

This already happens today. Copyright does not protect authors, it protects publishers. This is justified as protecting authors in the very narrow sense that authors did get to negotiate with publishers first, but at the most disadvantaged position they will ever be at in their career. They have to pay, but they can pay a pittance and authors will take it because they have no better options. The low- or zero-copyrigh…

No copyright means publisher can just take that draft, edit it and publish giving 0 to the author.

Re: The EU suppressed a 300-page study that found piracy doesn’t harm sales (2017)

#102

Post by FalconSensei »

dcow wrote: post #51
hellotomyrars wrote: post #46

I have a Netflix account and I still torrent the content because unless I use edge I don’t get greater than 720p. I torrent a lot of games because 2 hours (steam refund) is a very narrow window for a lot of games. The reality is 90% of them I don’t end up meshing with. The ones that I do, I buy.

Netflix streams in 4k but you have to pay $4 extra for premium or whatever.

4k is in the most expensive (4 screens) plan. If you only have 1 tv, that's 2 steps up (going to 2 screens for full hd, and 4 screens for 4k)

Re: The EU suppressed a 300-page study that found piracy doesn’t harm sales (2017)

#103

Post by FalconSensei »

unmole wrote: post #88
dcow wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix streams in 4k but you have to pay $4 extra for premium or whatever.

On Linux, there is no way to watch Netflix in 4k irrespective of the plan.

Yeah, and all because stupid DRM. Easier to torrent than to watch officially

Re: The EU suppressed a 300-page study that found piracy doesn’t harm sales (2017)

#104

Post by Matheus28 »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #49
Entinel wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with your disagreement. 10 years is too short, 70 years is too long. There should definitely be a reduction but 10 years isn't it.

Even 10 years is too generous. I'd rather make it 0 instead. I said 10 years because it's what would make copyright tolerable . The right thing as far as I'm concerned is abolishing it straight up. 10 years is a reasonable compromise. Remember, copyright exists at all because we allow it. The raw reality these monopolists face is that public domain is the default state of all information. We're all just pretending th…

You’re clearly someone who just wants to consume content without rewarding the authors for it. There’s no point arguing against a position that’s fundamentally flawed.

Re: The EU suppressed a 300-page study that found piracy doesn’t harm sales (2017)

#105

Post by the_mungler »

dcow wrote: post #51
hellotomyrars wrote: post #46

I have a Netflix account and I still torrent the content because unless I use edge I don’t get greater than 720p. I torrent a lot of games because 2 hours (steam refund) is a very narrow window for a lot of games. The reality is 90% of them I don’t end up meshing with. The ones that I do, I buy.

Netflix streams in 4k but you have to pay $4 extra for premium or whatever.

Even then, I don't believe they stream 4k to browsers. They only stream to devices like smart tvs or official Netflix apps with high quality. Your average browser is limited to 720p. This is the quintessential "pirating is better" example.

Re: The EU suppressed a 300-page study that found piracy doesn’t harm sales (2017)

#106

Post by unaindz »

falcolas wrote: post #96
matheusmoreira wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's not a reasonable compromise. Your proposal of 0 years in a nonstarter, and walking slightly back from that is still a nonstarter. On the contrary. Copyright itself is a non-starter. Remember, public domain is the natural state of information. They're the ones who need to convince us to respect whatever social contract they seek to impose. They are doing such a horrible job at it that it can be argued that co…

> Remember, public domain is the natural state of information. Nah, decaying is the natural state of information. It requires non-trivial effort to keep information available for reading and interpreting. Even paper, one of the best mediums for storing data over time, decomposes if not actively protected.

What does this have to do with anything?

Libraries handle the preserving and sharing to the public of information. In spite of copyright, not thanks to it.

Historically they literally copied one book into paper to duplicate/preserve it. That would be copyright infringement now.

And more recently copyright holders are trying to delete any archives that could be used for that purpose like the internet archive or LibGen. In other media we have game roms and copies of shows being illegal. Same treatment if it has been a week since release or it's been 20 years and you can't get it legally from anywhere.

Re: The EU suppressed a 300-page study that found piracy doesn’t harm sales (2017)

#107

Post by matheusmoreira »

falcolas wrote: post #94
matheusmoreira wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would you be pleased if that applied to all of your work too? That immediately anyone can start taking your work and making money off of it? Sure. From now on I either release my software as AGPLv3 or I don't release it at all. Truth is even if someone violates my license I'm not gonna waste my limited time on this earth litigating against them in court over it. I have better things to do. Stallman would disagree b…

> From now on I either release my software as AGPLv3 Why not just make it public domain? That's the default in a world without the right of ownership of code. > Oops, looks like it's our code now. How would you make money of it? It's not like you can sell it. > Were it not for copyright, we'd all be using peer to peer technology invented decades ago to consume content much more efficiently What content? How would it…

> Why not just make it public domain? That's the default in a world without the right of ownership of code.

Because if I do that I'm just unconditionally transferring wealth to corporations just as you claimed. No point in doing that while they still get to be "all rights reserved". It's only fair if nobody's protected.

> How would you make money of it? It's not like you can sell it.

By using it to do improve our own systems. Apparently what the GPL already provides used to be the norm back in the day before copyright protection was applied to software. We should go back to those days.

> How would it be paid for, since there's nothing that could be sold?

Selling copies after the fact doesn't make sense. Paying for the product before the work is done does. Crowdfunding, patronage. I'm sure they'll figure it out if they have to.

Re: The EU suppressed a 300-page study that found piracy doesn’t harm sales (2017)

#108

Post by ecnahc515 »

sylvain_kerkour wrote: post #92

The best way I have found to prevent the piracy of my book ( https://kerkour.com/black-hat-rust ) is to inundate pirate platforms with only the first chapter and with a discount code inside for those who can't afford the original price. My hypothesis is that if they enjoyed the first chapter, most people would want to support my work instead of being freeriders. So far it worked really well. Thinking that you can pre…

I assume the discount code you give in the "pirate" copy is unique, so do you have any stats on how many people are buying with the "pirate discount"?

Re: The EU suppressed a 300-page study that found piracy doesn’t harm sales (2017)

#109

Post by matheusmoreira »

Entinel wrote: post #93
matheusmoreira wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's not a reasonable compromise. Your proposal of 0 years in a nonstarter, and walking slightly back from that is still a nonstarter. On the contrary. Copyright itself is a non-starter. Remember, public domain is the natural state of information. They're the ones who need to convince us to respect whatever social contract they seek to impose. They are doing such a horrible job at it that it can be argued that co…

> On the contrary. Copyright itself is a non-starter. Clearly it is given that we are currently living with it.

On the contrary. Copyright infringement is the norm. People infringe copyrights all day every day and they don't even realize it. You infringe copyright every single time you "save as" a picture you like from the internet. You infringe it again if you send that picture to your family and friends via a messaging service. Made a funny meme? It's a derivative work, copyright infringement. It's the 21st century, all of this is normal and expected, it happens at massive scales and not a single person loses a second of sleep over any of it.

It boggles my mind that people think they can own and control this stuff. Think of the tyranny necessary to prevent that and enable something as archaic as copyright to work in the 21st century. You'd have to destroy computers as we know them today. You'd have to destroy our computing freedoms and everything the word "hacker" stands for to achieve such a dystopia. You'd have to turn computers into passive content consumption appliances fully owned by corporations.

Re: The EU suppressed a 300-page study that found piracy doesn’t harm sales (2017)

#110

Post by endisneigh »

FalconSensei wrote: post #100
endisneigh wrote: post #67

To be honest I’ve never understood why people believe they’re entitled other people’s work for free. Perhaps someone can clarify?

Perhaps (and I'm just assuming), you were never too poor, without a library to access any kind of media and decent internet/computer to watch something on streaming?

What's the relevance of being poor, though? Should poor people not have to pay for things? I have been poor and usually used free content.
Post reply on HN