Live data from Hacker News

The case for physical media ownership

dervis.de

241–250 of 392 posts

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#241
post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, of course it's easier to pirate it. The problem is that its unethical (and illegal). That you find it inconvenient to pay for things you want is not a valid justification.

Your values are outdated and impractical. You've obviously stalled at the "law and order" phase of moral development which enables the parasites who are abusing copyright law in order to extract every cent from us.

Someday you'll pass the 'edgelord' phase of development (hopefully).

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#242
post #44

I agree with the sentiment implied by the author, but I would reword it slightly. If you don't have the freedom to share something, you don't own it. I disagree with the interpretation that it needs to be held physically. Digital ownership is still ownership. I go out of my way to find music on Bandcamp, games on GOG, and rip movies myself using MakeMKV. I wish I could encourage people to continue embracing physical…

> I disagree with the interpretation that it needs to be held physically. Digital ownership is still ownership. I go out of my way to find music on Bandcamp, games on GOG, and rip movies myself using MakeMKV. Files on a hard disk that you own are still files that you physically own. The only difference between those files and, say, a DVD, is that the encoding is more space-efficient.

I think the idea is that with a book or a DVD you're not allowed to copy it. You're allowed to lend or sell it though.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#243
post #217
post #3

Just pirate it. They can't tell you this but there's a quagmire of rights, licenses, agreements, treaties... and you can untangle this Goridan Knot by just pirating, especially media, for your own use. There are pixel perfect 4k drm-free rips out there made by people who poured thousands of hours into understanding codecs. They will work on any platform, forever, you can stream them or play offline. These rips can be…

Then you need a NAS, a backup process (backing up large collections of movies to S3 is actually pretty expensive). You need to keep your NAS up to date. You need to install / configure Plex, oops that's closed source now, uninstall that and get Jellyfin. Eventually your NAS hardware will be outdated and you'll have to get a new one and migrate your files over. Even for technical people this is a pain over time. Nothi…

A NAS, yes, but why bother with a backup process? I know it's sacrilege for most admins, but if you're already pirating the media you can just pirate it again if your storage breaks. Yes it takes a while but so would restoring from regular backups.

Backup the .torrent files, skip the rest.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#244
post #3

Just pirate it. They can't tell you this but there's a quagmire of rights, licenses, agreements, treaties... and you can untangle this Goridan Knot by just pirating, especially media, for your own use. There are pixel perfect 4k drm-free rips out there made by people who poured thousands of hours into understanding codecs. They will work on any platform, forever, you can stream them or play offline. These rips can be…

I’d be in favour of a law that if a product cannot reasonably be purchased legally obtaining it via other means is not piracy (e.g. in my country 80% of movies are not available simply because the market is too small, even though I would be ok with English - I still don’t want to pirate so I buy physical media)

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#245
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, those aren't the restrictions. But there are restrictions. First-sale doctrine allows lending. But you are not allowed to play the movie in, say, a restaurant, theater, or other public place.

That's fine, but that's very different from what the post to which I was responding said.

Ya got me. You can also show it in your friend's personal home.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#246
post #158
post #3

Just pirate it. They can't tell you this but there's a quagmire of rights, licenses, agreements, treaties... and you can untangle this Goridan Knot by just pirating, especially media, for your own use. There are pixel perfect 4k drm-free rips out there made by people who poured thousands of hours into understanding codecs. They will work on any platform, forever, you can stream them or play offline. These rips can be…

Yes, of course it's easier to pirate it. The problem is that its unethical (and illegal). That you find it inconvenient to pay for things you want is not a valid justification.

You can look up Gabe Newell's quotes on this, but the reason for piracy often has more to do with the fact that the pirate product is better (or more respectful to the user, or less hoops to jump through) than economic reasons.

Especially for people outside of the US, licencing and region locks can make it extremely technically difficult to source and play a genuine piece of media - whereas the pirate one takes 3 clicks.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#247
post #3

Just pirate it. They can't tell you this but there's a quagmire of rights, licenses, agreements, treaties... and you can untangle this Goridan Knot by just pirating, especially media, for your own use. There are pixel perfect 4k drm-free rips out there made by people who poured thousands of hours into understanding codecs. They will work on any platform, forever, you can stream them or play offline. These rips can be…

I have a TrueNAS server with Jellyfin, but I'd still much rather have a physical blu-ray, especially if it's something with a Criterion release. I think the "inconvenience" of physical media is enjoyable. It makes me commit to actually watch a movie and not just have it on in the background while I look at my phone, much like how a physical record makes me commit to listening to a full album.

I borrow my Criterions from the library or a local movie rental place run by a film fan. I used to use SwapACD for music but activity there has really died off - regret declining titles offered to me after I started streaming music as they were rare one-offs.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#249
post #44

I agree with the sentiment implied by the author, but I would reword it slightly. If you don't have the freedom to share something, you don't own it. I disagree with the interpretation that it needs to be held physically. Digital ownership is still ownership. I go out of my way to find music on Bandcamp, games on GOG, and rip movies myself using MakeMKV. I wish I could encourage people to continue embracing physical…

[flagged]

Is it? A few weeks ago I had to contact support to remove some games from my account and the response time was decent.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#250
post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I disagree with the interpretation that it needs to be held physically. Digital ownership is still ownership. I go out of my way to find music on Bandcamp, games on GOG, and rip movies myself using MakeMKV. Files on a hard disk that you own are still files that you physically own. The only difference between those files and, say, a DVD, is that the encoding is more space-efficient.

I think the idea is that with a book or a DVD you're not allowed to copy it. You're allowed to lend or sell it though.

Is that the state of things? I thought you could copy a legally purchased thing, just not distribute it?
Post reply on HN