Piracy isn't wrong.

Piracy isn't wrong.

Intellectual property is.

All of human creation is based on previous creation. Drawing arbitrary lines around how ideas can be used serves no-one except for media conglomerates. The only times at which IP law ever seemed reasonable was during the time where it was only enforceable against other corporate bodies. The advent of the internet and the shift of focus towards enforcement against individual private citizens has highlighted enormous contradictions in its application.

> b-but without IP law there would be no incentive to create
IP law does not protect or nurture any human incentive to create. The human drive to create is innate and unkillable, as evidenced by the huge amount of IP-law-breaking creations. IP law serves only to incentivize corporate investment in shitting out the same garbage over and over based on knowledge of a guaranteed return on investment due to name recognition.

> b-but piracy hurts sales
literally every time this has been studied it has been found to be false. Piracy does not hurt sales, people who pirate something are in no way "potential customers." They represent an almost completely distinct group.

> b-but preservation isn't our job, it's the company's
preservation is literally exclusively the domain of us, the public. Companies not only do not have any incentive to preserve non-profitable works and are in fact incentivized against it, whereas the entire foundation of culture is based upon preservation and sharing of our creation. It's the entire point behind the Public Domain, which has consistently been eroded by corporate interests in service of profit-seeking.

It is literally (in the actual, literal meaning of the word "literally") your moral, ethical duty to pirate.

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I'm not reading any of that. I will simply refuse to pirate anything and discourage others from doing so.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      that's fine, thankfully piracy is its own encouragement and literal decades of campaigns against it have done nothing to dissuade people.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Of course it is, because people think they like getting things for free. They like it even more when they think they're "getting away with" something they shouldn't be doing.
        I'm simply concerned with people being properly paid for the things they worked hard to create, protected against criminals that would steal from them.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          same.
          luckily for all of us, piracy has been shown not to negatively affect these things.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          corporations arent entitled to sales, a pirate wouldve never purchased the product in the first place, therefore not being a customer in the first place.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Worry not, you can rest assured nobody's being properly paid whether you pirate or not, the real talents behind your media are almost universally undercut.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            based

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Based. FPBP

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      If only someone would discourage you from taking HRT pills

  2. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    You can't force people to pay for something they don't want to. And copying files isn't hurting the other end in any way. So anti-piracy laws are just arbitrarily bending logic in order to get away with a potential increase in revenue.

    It's already been proven that people are going to buy your game if they think it's worth it. Companies just want to squeeze their customer's last pennies. A practice that in my opinion sounds more like what an actual pirate would do.

  3. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    If there was no intellectual property then big corporations would still use it in their favor.

    Someone small (Ex. an Indie Developer) would make an original concept/IP that's legitimately fun and exciting, and then some mega corporation with billions of dollars would pump out some soulless game based on it and throw millions into advertising it. Then the vast number of moronic normies would believe that the mega corporation made the original concept and the small developer is the one ripping off the idea. They'd do that constantly and essentially own all intellectual property through popularity.

    Would it prevent you from playing those original works or from them being made? No, but it'd be incredibly infuriating when popularity is what pushes things onto people through search engines or social media. It'd be incredibly difficult to find or even talk about the original works compared to the megacorporation rip offs that would get shoved in your face constantly.

  4. 2 years ago
    Anonymous
  5. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >IP law does not protect or nurture any human incentive to create
    spoken like an ignorant commie
    why would i bother creating Sonic if i can't profit from it?
    >b-b-buh you should make vidya as a hobby, not to earn shekkels!
    hobbyist devs make the bulk of the broken unfunny shovelware on steam, anything with even a slightly little bit of quality in it was made by someone trying to make a buck

    sure, IP laws are fricking broken giving massive corporations like Disney the right to ban hammer kindergartens who pain Mikey on their walls, and they keep loggying to extend the time in which their IP hit popular domain

    but if people can't profit from their creations, nor ensure that at least one generation of their descendants can reap the fruits of their parent's labor, then all those with the mind and the will to create will go away to do so in a place that allows them to profit from it

    >The human drive to create is innate and unkillable
    perhaps, but putting food on the table is more important, and if people can't do so by their "unkillable drive to create", they will dedicate their time to mopping floors, peeling potatoes, scrubbing toilets or anything that gives them bread at the end of the day, instead of dedicating their time to perfecting their "unkillable drive to create"

    but don't believe me
    ask anyone who has lived under soviet boots if they or anyone else they knew had ever felt compelled to do even slightly more than the bare minimum necessary,

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >why would i bother creating Sonic if i can't profit from it?
      this already happens every day
      but here's a fun thought experiment: even using a single piece of IP, there's been enormous changes in the laws "protecting" it between its inception versus the laws today.

      is your argument "IP laws as they currently exist are the only way to ensure that a 'Sonic' can be made?"
      if so, this is objectively and immediately false. Sonic was not created under todays IP laws.

      is your argument instead "IP laws as they existed at the time of Sonic's creation are the only way to ensure that a 'Sonic' can be made?"
      if so, because of changes in IP law, we are already living in a world where you have no incentive to create Sonic.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >laws change
        point taken, but the OP was not calling for a reform of IP law to wrestle control away from megacorporations, he was arguing in favor of abolishing IP laws altogether
        that's like cutting off a whole hand because the tip of a finger got infected

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          I think that while OP's proposed change is way more drastic, the idea that without IP law people wouldn't create is already disproven by the wealth of culture and creation available to us from a time before IP law of any kind.

          And the way I see it with regards to your analogy of the finger, IP law is less an infection and more of a cancer. The solution is, in fact, to cut it off. It has been spreading and expanding like a tumor since its inception.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >he requires time-limited, government-granted monopolies on ideas in order to generate wealth
      who's the real commie here

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >generate wealth
        we are not talking about an expendable consumer product like an apple or a shoe, we are talking about entertainment media that can be plagiarized by talentless hacks
        if i invent Tetris and want to sell it, i will sell it in a place where the law will guaranty me that no low effort rip off will get away with stealing my idea
        Take Walt Disney (the man, not his company) as an example of the worst and best of IP law
        his first character was stolen by israelitelywood and he was left dirt poor because of it, so he made his second character (Mickey) somewhere away from israelitelywood where he could keep the rights and build an empire upon that character, and with that empire he propelled the art of animation further forward than anyone else had before, all because he was allowed to profit from his creation without low effort copycats stealing his potential customers

        Government over reach if shit, but without a government, you have corporate overreach

  6. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Intellectual property is theft. What I do with my hard drive is my business. You can’t claim some sort of in-absentia control over the arrangement of the filings on those platters. You can’t own data.

  7. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    based kropotkin reader

  8. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Truth

  9. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >*hits blunt* you can't, like, own an idea, maaaaaaaaaan

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      this but actually unironically

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Okay, so if you create a game I can shamelessly rip it off and not pay you a dime, right?

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Yes.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            And you'd be okay with someone else profiting off your ideas and not paying you?

  10. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Do pirates actually believe they're not hurting sales by what they're doing? Like, this isn't a meme? Just admit you people want stuff for free.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      a better question is "do pirates actually care whether or not they're hurting sales by doing what they do?"
      and in my case the answer is a resounding "No!"

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        That's an obvious answer to a moronic question

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      It's not my duty to prop up your sales numbers.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      if I pirate a game, its because I won't buy it to begin with. how is that hurting sales?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >How's that hurting sales
        I won't buy X to begin with because I planned to pirate X from the beginning.
        Easiest hypothetical in the world

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Pirates are literal Black folk. They break the law just because they can and they only care about their own gratification.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        I care about undermining the israelite and his poisonous influence on my nation's legal system.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Laws are a spook
        next you're going to tell me taxation is fine because 'the government gives us like roads and shit (that they also tax you for using LOL)'

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >mmmmm oh yes corporate daddy, keep fricking my ass and taking my money no matter how many times you scam me and make a fool out of me

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *