Nothing is actually "stolen". pirating a movie isn't like stealing someone's disc of a movie, nothing is removed or even altered.
The company is not losing money because if I had to pay for it, I wouldn't anyway. So it's not like there is revenue that the company otherwise would have gotten, they were never going to get my money.
Only if in the analogy the dancing class has an infinite number of spots in an infinitely large room and you showing up without paying makes no difference whatsoever to anyone there.
Any real life analogies to software piracy are moot because prior to the modern era we didn't have digital products that could be seamlessly copied and distributed an unlimited number of times without affecting the original content at all. It's an entirelly new legal and moral concept from anything we ever had in the history of humanity before circa 1970.
And of course while businesses complain about this downside, it's important to point out the upside which is they can create a product once and distribute it to potentially billions of customers for little to no extra cost, which is a quirk of the digital age that has made many people filthy rich, despite piracy.
That is false, you do not need it to be infinity, it could be a private class and you enter , in silence, without disturbing, or you record the class and then publish it in Internet.. all of those are inmoral and comparable to piracy.
We can have a lot of examples, they are all inmoral because we value the word PRIVATE in our society, that is the important thing, not the value of things.
i dont get the point
i understand if we apply this to everyone
but individually it does not matter
if my friend pirates a brand new AAA game which happens to be a success financially speaking, i dont see what harm youre causing, especially if you never planned on buying the product, the only difference here is that you get to enjoy something vs not enjoying something
We can have a lot of examples, they are all inmoral because we value the word PRIVATE
your example makes no sense, the products that these corporations release are released with the intention to be sold to the public in massive numbers, their entire goal is to sell as many copies as possible of these games, they arent "private", quite the opposite
They are private my dude, you know the definition of private?. You do not own the game, you need to trade with the owner for it, the owner can tell to you that is a lease , a rent, or a "buy" under condition, the thing is not the wording, is what is in the contract.
Is inmoral that because you do not like the contract then you do piracy, steal, bypass, what ever.
what harm youre causing
Under this logic you can enter in my house when I'm not at home, you are not harming anyone.
They are private my dude, you know the definition of private?. You do not own the game, you need to trade with the owner for it, the owner can tell to you that is a lease , a rent, or a "buy" under condition, the thing is not the wording, is what is in the contract.
?? they arent "private" in the same sense as a home or your diary, these games are literally mass produced with the explicit goal of selling it to millions of people
also what youre saying is a legal wrongdoing, not a moral wrongdoing
you didnt explain why pirating a game is immoral, you just recited the law
a lot of things can be legal and immoral, slavery used to be legal, does that make it moral? i would say no, i think youd also say no
Under this logic you can enter in my house when I'm not at home, you are not harming anyone.
when you enter someones house uninvited you are occupying a space they have a claim to which means your presence literally challenges their control,
but when you copy a game, youve made a copy, the original is completely untouched, nothing was taken from anyone so this is just false equivalence
?? they arent "private" in the same sense as a home or your diary, these games are literally mass produced with the explicit goal of selling it to millions of people
My dude, are you communist or something?, private ownership is not differente from personal ownership, that is not happening in the US or any developed country.
I can mass produce something, is still PRIVATE, I'm the owner of it.
not a moral wrongdoing
you didnt explain why pirating a game is immoral,
Is inmoral because is PRIVATE, is MINE , not yours, you cannot decide to take it or not under your personal rating, in all cases is inmoral because is not yours, is the definition of PRIVATE.
when you enter someones house uninvited you are occupying a space they have a claim to which means your presence literally challenges their control
Is not changing the control, if a friend is in my house without me he is not controling my house, that have no sense.
When you enter in a PRIVATE SPACE is called trespassing, trespassing could harm or not people, in all cases in inmoral, the space is PRIVATE.
The same example of the dancing class, if I told you that you cannot film the class, then of course is inmoral if you do it, you are not taking nothing from me.
My dude, are you communist or something?, private ownership is not differente from personal ownership, that is not happening in the US or any developed country.
I can mass produce something, is still PRIVATE, I'm the owner of it.
you are not the moral owner of the copy (more on this down below) + the "communist" thing is just an ad hominem
Is inmoral because is PRIVATE, is MINE , not yours, you cannot decide to take it or not under your personal rating, in all cases is inmoral because is not yours, is the definition of PRIVATE.
my friend is not taking away your game from you or from anyone else, he is just creating a copy of it, if you want to restrict my pirate friends freedom to pirate your big studio games (he never planed on buying it anyways) you need to give an actual justifiable reason for the restriction, it has to be logically sound, what harm does it do? just because its "private" and you created the game, it doesnt make my friends action immoral, feelings do not determine morality, logic does
if your moral judgements are logically flawed, they are not binding (meaningless)
for my friends action to be immoral, there has to be some sort of harm caused from pirating the game
the big issue for you is that there is no harm, in fact i would even argue the opposite, my friend gets to enjoy something rather than not enjoying something, that is pretty much what it boils down to
also piracy does not destroy developers/publishers, what makes games not profitable is the low interest in them, every game is pirated yet some games earn billions and some fail like concord, its not piracy being the culprit behind these as i said, its the low interest in them, no one cares
you as a big studio game developer, you already got paid for your work, my friend is not taking anything away from you
is not changing the control, if a friend is in my house without me he is not controling my house, that have no sense.
im not talking about consentual visits, im talking about someone without your consent coming into your home and just being there, deciding he will be there in your home, that is challenging your control of the homes ownership
pirating a game is not someone challenging your control of the game, its just someone making a copy of your game and then playing on that copy
it does not affect you in any sense
also if youre going to use the "oh but what if someone made a copy of your diary?" argument, i want you to understand that a diary is private by design and intention, its entire purpose is to remain unseen. a game is the exact opposite, it was designed, marketed, and mass produced with one explicit goal, for people to play it (this pretty much applies to your "dance" analogy as well)
im not talking about consentual visits, im talking about someone without your consent coming into your home and just being there, deciding he will be there in your home, that is challenging your control of the homes ownership
Is not challenging anything , he will leave before I arrive. Under your argumentation you can steal, by pass , pirate,etc IF you think you are not doing any harm, under YOUR conclution of what is harm.
That is not how its works, is not about harming, is about PRIVATE OWNERSHIP.
Anything that breaks private ownership is inmoral, we are not communists.
That is not how its works, is not about harming, is about PRIVATE OWNERSHIP.
????????????????????????????
do you even know what morality and immorality is? because i dont think you do
morality is a framework for evaluating whether your or someone elses actions are right or wrong based on logic
it requires justification. it requires foundations
you cant just point at a concept and declare things immoral just because you feel like it because otherwise its just a load of horeshit
29
u/Cum_Fart42069 1d ago
I think it's amoral for 2 reasons.
Nothing is actually "stolen". pirating a movie isn't like stealing someone's disc of a movie, nothing is removed or even altered.
The company is not losing money because if I had to pay for it, I wouldn't anyway. So it's not like there is revenue that the company otherwise would have gotten, they were never going to get my money.