this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023
310 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37720 readers
615 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (10 children)

And media costs money to make.

But not to copy, which is what you are asserting is being "stolen". No one is claiming that turnstile jumpers are taking away money from train manufacturers. You're having to mix analogies, because copying something isn't theft.

[–] Chozo@kbin.social 4 points 11 months ago (9 children)

I feel like you're being intentionally obtuse. The point is that in both examples, somebody is exploiting somebody else's labor without paying.

[–] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (8 children)

There is no labor in making digital copies.

You are trying to blur the line between the media/art/music/film, etc, and the reproductions of it.

Artists do deserve to be paid for their work, but artists do not deserve to maintain ownership over the already-sold assets, nor whatever happens to those assets afterwards (like copies made). If you want to say they should retain commercial rights for reproduction of it, sure, but resell of the originally-sold work (e.g. the mp3 file), and non-commercial reproductions from that sold work? Nah.

They didn't put in labor towards that. To say they did expands "labor" far beyond any reasonable definition.

[–] Chozo@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You're trying to blur the line between what is and what should be. We don't live in an ideal world.

[–] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 7 points 11 months ago

Yup, many people (like you) consider copyright morally okay, and many people (like me) consider copyright infringement morally okay.

Not an ideal world for either of us, I guess.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)