Earlier quoted context omitted.
Buddy we’d still be listening to cds if pirating didn’t exist.
Spotify started out pirating.
As did Crunchyroll.
Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
31–40 of 59 posts
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's why I don't feel bad pirating textbooks.
Screw the author's labor, eh?
Well, this is part of the problem.
Sometimes "the author's labor" amounts to reordering questions at the back to mark it as new revision and charge 150+ usd for a book that should have been $20 brand new, and is only purchased because it's a required title in a required class to get a piece of paper required for employment.
In that case... Fuck yes. Screw the author's "labor". Arguably, screw the whole damn system.
---
Copyright rarely helps small authors who actually need it.
It usually gets employed by conglomerates that own distribution and are already screwing authors as hard as they think they can get away with.
It's genuinely a pretty terrible system in its current form.
We can do better.
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#33Sky should sue the AI companies if they want to protect their copyright. Anything else is a joke and an insult to fair laws.
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's why I don't feel bad pirating textbooks.
Screw the author's labor, eh?
Who's labor wad exploited by said publisher?
I would personally love and do support ethical publishers /companies and authors themselves but I refuse to engage with the exploiting kind, since there is effectively little difference between them and pirates.
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#35I'm pretty uneasy about legal action against the subscribers themselves. If you can prove intent, maybe? But I'd argue many or even most don't realize they're doing anything illegal. These IPTV companies, in my experience, never advertise that it's illegal. It's just give us money for a lot of TV channels, just like a cable company does.
I'm not familiar with how these IPTV companies market their services, but I'm extremely skeptical of the notion that people don't realize they're buying something illegal when they're paying a small percentage of what the services themselves would cost. It's like those folks that sold bootleg DVDs out of their trenchcoats in Manhattan - the defense of "gosh, I never knew buying a just-released-in-theaters Hollywood b…
It’s a little different because it’s easy for these IPTV pirates to whip up slick branding. Something more like if a guy in a nice looking uniform for a DVD company you hadn’t heard of offered to sell you movies. Especially for folks who aren’t very internet savvy, it can be easy to miss the subtle tells that an offering isn’t legit (even more so when the service works just fine)
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#36I'm pretty uneasy about legal action against the subscribers themselves. If you can prove intent, maybe? But I'd argue many or even most don't realize they're doing anything illegal. These IPTV companies, in my experience, never advertise that it's illegal. It's just give us money for a lot of TV channels, just like a cable company does.
I'm not familiar with how these IPTV companies market their services, but I'm extremely skeptical of the notion that people don't realize they're buying something illegal when they're paying a small percentage of what the services themselves would cost. It's like those folks that sold bootleg DVDs out of their trenchcoats in Manhattan - the defense of "gosh, I never knew buying a just-released-in-theaters Hollywood b…
>but I'm extremely skeptical of the notion that people don't realize they're buying something illegal when they're paying a small percentage of what the services themselves would cost.
Why? There's lots of cases where there's much-cheaper alternatives. I have a mobile phone plan that costs a small fraction of what most of my coworkers pay, because I didn't get a full-service unlimited plan with a subsidized new-every-2-years phone, for instance. Is my phone company hacking into the other company's system to give me service? Who knows, but I trust the government regulators and judicial system enough to assume this isn't happening, or else the company they're riding on the back of would have the service stopped. In reality, low-cost mobile services like this contract with the big carriers to use their spare capacity, and the service is basically 2nd-class too.
It's not a consumer's job to know how businesses operate internally or if they're doing something illegal.
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's why I don't feel bad pirating textbooks.
Screw the author's labor, eh?
Yes. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications,_Inc._v._Ru.... - "sweat of the brow" does not confer copyright, only creativity does.
More to the point: the reason you find so many people advocating for pirating textbooks specifically, is because textbooks have often been used by authors/institutions/publishers to fleece students:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textbook#New_editions_and_the_...
> Some textbook companies have countered [the second hand market] by encouraging teachers to assign homework that must be done on the publisher's website. Students with a new textbook can use the pass code in the book to register on the site; otherwise they must pay the publisher to access the website and complete assigned homework.
> Harvard economics chair James K. Stock has stated that new editions are often not about significant improvements to the content. "New editions are to a considerable extent simply another tool used by publishers and textbook authors to maintain their revenue stream, that is, to keep up prices."
Students can tell when they're being scammed, and are more than happy to go to war with scammers such as these.
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#38Home Taping Is Killing Music
We left side 2 blank so you can help
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#39I'm pretty uneasy about legal action against the subscribers themselves. If you can prove intent, maybe? But I'd argue many or even most don't realize they're doing anything illegal. These IPTV companies, in my experience, never advertise that it's illegal. It's just give us money for a lot of TV channels, just like a cable company does.
People refer to them as “dodgy boxes”. They know it’s illegal and no one cares.
Everyone in the country knows this and either has one or a family member has one
Re: Sky Wins Irish Court Order to Unmask 300 Pirate IPTV Users via Revolut Bank
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s unpopular because it’s a bad argument. It’s not theft because you don’t take anything away. You just create a copy and don’t pay for it, but that’s not theft.
A spy steals secrets. Credit can be stolen from you by your boss. Your competitor steals your ideas. In colloquial usage, theft is the act of stealing. The legal term is copyright infringement.
When you "steal" a secret, it's not longer a secret. When you "steal" credit, the original thinker no longer gets credit. In both cases, the thing itself was destroyed: in the former, the secret is no longer a secret at all and in the latter the boss will no longer be considered the mastermind behind the idea. When you "pirate" something the original copy remains and the creator retains it and the rights to sell copies of it and will still benefit from selling copies. It's not theft.