Editorial: "How piracy changed my life" • Hacker News Board

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#51

Post by westicle » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 9:44 PM UTC

eshvk wrote: post #39

chasing wrote: post #5

I'm glad things worked out for Vlad -- when I was younger, I pirated a fair amount of software and games, and, like him, I think it enabled me to get inspired to learn more about computers in general and, indeed, now I stare at them all day for work. But. I'm not sure what the bigger point is, here. Should we be okay with piracy as long as the pirate is using it for self-betterment? Do games count for that? What abou…

Since the car analogy isn't working: Let me try another one, equally with flaws no doubts. :-) Piracy as we known it is rampant of the coasts of Somalia (Yes, I am talking about real world pirates). One of the reasons why that is happening is the systematic breakdown of the livelihoods of fisherman in the region due to dumping of toxic wastes of those coasts and the free flow of arms. Now, it is arguable that those f…

If people weren't eating up your "stealing a car" example, I doubt the "violently kidnapping and holding for ransom" example will fare any better.

How about this: a young woman has a sick child in a jurisdiction without universal health care. Her income is insufficient to pay for his treatment, so she has sex with some rich men in exchange for money. Sadly, prostitution is illegal.

Is it ever right to break the law in order to improve your prospects (or those of your family)? Some would say it is a moral imperative.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#52

Post by cremnob » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 9:45 PM UTC

angersock wrote: post #41

cremnob wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This trope comes up every time piracy is discussed. The point is no one is talking about the legal meaning of "stealing" versus "copyright infringement". What people are saying is that it's immoral. The fact that a content company's product is easily stolen simply because the nature of his business means it is effortless to do through the internet doesn't change anything. If you go to a lawyer for legal advice and th…

Then they need to say it is immoral--a position which may arguably be correct--and not say that it is stealing--a position which is intellectually dishonest and trivially shown to be incorrect. Choice of words here is very, very important. If you want to start staking out a moral claim on information, you damned well had better choose your message carefully.

It's semantics and is irrelevant every time this topic comes up because no one is actually talking about legal definitions. Pirates always seem to miss that it's a moral argument when they trot out these familiar lines (the irony isn't lost on me). Whether or not you're guilty of petty theft, shoplifting, larceny, or burglary is for your lawyers and the courts to determine. For me and others from my position it is much simpler, you're still a thief and it's still wrong.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#53

Post by agumonkey » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 9:45 PM UTC

angersock wrote: post #44

Tyrant505 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly is HARD to pirate? edit: More specifically, Crack. I remember x-force having sources in all the major places ready to dump it to their cracker division.

Skype for a very long time had some absurd protection against things like attaching debuggers, adding code, and whatnot (as I recall). There was a great presentation about it, but I cannot for the life of me find it.

To my very limited knowledge, the most difficult software to crack was Steinberg Cubase. Such a PITA the hackers decided not to do it ever again. They quoted a ridiculously large figure for the amount code devoted to detect cracking (~30%), and having a significant impact on performance.

I had links about about bypassing anti-debugging techniques, I'll see if I can get my hands on them again.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#54

Post by anonymous » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 9:48 PM UTC

k-mcgrady wrote: post #17

lucian1900 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that taking strong measures against copyright infringement is stupid. Many (if not most) of the people that do it would pay a reasonable price if it was possible for them to do so. Also, stealing a car is nothing like copyright infringement. There is absolutely no parallel you can draw there.

> "Many (if not most) of the people that do it would pay a reasonable price if it was possible for them to do so." And the fact that they can't afford it gives them justification for stealing it? Would it not make more sense, that if you can't afford something you aren't entitled to it? If a poor or homeless person were to steal food from a shop they wouldn't be allowed to do it because, although they would like to p…

The difference with your homeless person is that these people are stealing education.

You're committing an act of classism. Please check your rich whiteboy privilege.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#55

Post by gizmo686 » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 9:49 PM UTC

Devilboy wrote: post #13

chasing wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you understand my point. In a general sense, is doing something criminal okay if it's for self-betterment? Pirating Windows does rob Microsoft of some small portion of their rights as a creator.

Piracy for personal use is a 'victimless' (don't bite my head off please) crime, that's why it's OK here. Stealing is not.

Not necessarily. When you pirate something, you are hurting the owner's chances of selling it to you in the future. If you know that there is no chance that you will buy it, then it is victimless. If however things change and you are in a position where you would buy it, you are far less likely to, which does hurt the seller.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#56

Post by angersock » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 9:55 PM UTC

cremnob wrote: post #52

angersock wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then they need to say it is immoral--a position which may arguably be correct--and not say that it is stealing--a position which is intellectually dishonest and trivially shown to be incorrect. Choice of words here is very, very important. If you want to start staking out a moral claim on information, you damned well had better choose your message carefully.

It's semantics and is irrelevant every time this topic comes up because no one is actually talking about legal definitions. Pirates always seem to miss that it's a moral argument when they trot out these familiar lines (the irony isn't lost on me). Whether or not you're guilty of petty theft, shoplifting, larceny, or burglary is for your lawyers and the courts to determine. For me and others from my position it is mu…

It's completely relevant, especially because the normal intuitions about stealing and property rights here are so ill-defined.

Consider, if you will, that for hundreds of years the concept of intellectual property--indeed, even the idea of land ownership in some places-was foreign. You simply cannot throw up your hands and say "But semantics!" and expect to be taken seriously.

At best, you look lazy--at worst, you appear a sycophant to those who rely on provably unneeded monopolies of information distribution.

You're position is indeed much simpler: you seem to be either unwilling or unable to understand that this ongoing public dialogue about intellectual property, copyright, and related matters is something that isn't cut and dried.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#57

Post by polskibus » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 9:57 PM UTC

Information wants to be free. Nothing will stop it. Humanity has been copying "proprietary" information forever. People gossip about work and other secrets, copy other people's notes, etc. Computer software is just yet another example of it, the scenery of old Soviet block just puts a bit more contrast to it in comparison to Western experiences. Now, generating a trend, by for example making your information the dominant one (ie. Microsoft and MS Office) is a great tactic, that bears long-lasting fruits.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#58

Post by cabalamat » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 10:00 PM UTC

chasing wrote: post #5

I'm glad things worked out for Vlad -- when I was younger, I pirated a fair amount of software and games, and, like him, I think it enabled me to get inspired to learn more about computers in general and, indeed, now I stare at them all day for work. But. I'm not sure what the bigger point is, here. Should we be okay with piracy as long as the pirate is using it for self-betterment? Do games count for that? What abou…

> What about pirating Game of Thrones episodes?

If piracy caused future GoT episodes to not be made, that would be a bad outcome. But it won't happen. A series of GoT costs $50 million to make and they could probably fairly easily crowdfund it, (e.g. $10 * 5 million or some other multiple). I'm sure lots of people would be prepared to pay that amount (or a lot more) to ensure they could watch the next series -- I know I would.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#59

Post by kybernetikos » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 10:01 PM UTC

cremnob wrote: post #27

Devilboy wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stealing a car deprives someone of a car. Copying a car does not.

This trope comes up every time piracy is discussed. The point is no one is talking about the legal meaning of "stealing" versus "copyright infringement". What people are saying is that it's immoral. The fact that a content company's product is easily stolen simply because the nature of his business means it is effortless to do through the internet doesn't change anything. If you go to a lawyer for legal advice and th…

> Some people are honest about it and say "I just don't want to pay for it". But most people I hear justifying piracy feel entitled to it and don't think there's anything wrong.

And what is dishonest about that?

When a builder builds a house he gets paid for his work. If he wants more money, he has to do more building. He can't just sit back and take a payment every time someone enters that building for the rest of his life.

Nurses, doctors, lawyers, shopkeepers, mechanics, service staff, chefs, teachers all have the same deal. You can't multiply your work by the people who benefit from it forever (maybe everyone who likes the person whose life you saved?) and get paid by each one.

Now to me, that seems sane and normal. You want more money, you do more work. Getting the government to pass special laws allowing you to extract rent from your creative endevour for every person who experiences it going into the future is what seems dishonest to me.

Re: Editorial: "How piracy changed my life"

#60

Post by BadDesign » Sat, Dec 01, 2012, 10:02 PM UTC

I think he's completely unaware of the GNU/Linux distributions and the gratis software that comes along with them and the freedoms that that software offers to the user.

" “Free software” means software that respects users' freedom and community. Roughly, the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. With these freedoms, the users (both individually and collectively) control the program and what it does for them.

A program is free software if the program's users have the four essential freedoms:

- The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).

- The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

- The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).

- The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

A program is free software if users have all of these freedoms. Thus, you should be free to redistribute copies, either with or without modifications, either gratis or charging a fee for distribution, to anyone anywhere. Being free to do these things means (among other things) that you do not have to ask or pay for permission to do so. "

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html