Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Pirated movies , software
zidangus
Veteran
I am just wondering what peoples take is on downloading pirated movies and software and even watching free football online. Its is so easy to access pirated stuff on the internet, you don't even have to download it now, for instance you can watch movies and premiership football for free streaming online if you have a fast enough connection.
Do you think this beaks the second precept ?
"To refrain from taking that which is not freely given"
Is it really such a bad thing to watch a football match for free on the internet instead of paying money to a billionair such as rupert murdoch for the privalage of watching your own team ? Is it such a bad thing to download software such as msoffice if you have no way of being able to pay the price of a real version ? While I do not download software (as I use linux which has all software FREE and open source )
I have to admit I do watch football for free on the internet, and I do watch movies for free on the internet and I openly admit that I do not feel any guilt whatso ever about doing it. However I would never actually go and physically steal anything material from a person as I know I would feel really really guilty and bad about myself for doing it. So in my mind their is a real moral difference between these two things, even though technically they are both defined as stealing.
Anyway it would be interesting to hear anyones take on if they feel its right or wrong to watch or download pirated stuff.
Metta to all sentient beings
Do you think this beaks the second precept ?
"To refrain from taking that which is not freely given"
Is it really such a bad thing to watch a football match for free on the internet instead of paying money to a billionair such as rupert murdoch for the privalage of watching your own team ? Is it such a bad thing to download software such as msoffice if you have no way of being able to pay the price of a real version ? While I do not download software (as I use linux which has all software FREE and open source )
I have to admit I do watch football for free on the internet, and I do watch movies for free on the internet and I openly admit that I do not feel any guilt whatso ever about doing it. However I would never actually go and physically steal anything material from a person as I know I would feel really really guilty and bad about myself for doing it. So in my mind their is a real moral difference between these two things, even though technically they are both defined as stealing.
Anyway it would be interesting to hear anyones take on if they feel its right or wrong to watch or download pirated stuff.
Metta to all sentient beings
0
Comments
To each their own according to their conscience on this one I say.
There is a very real sense in which the content producer is not having anything taken from them if one would not have purchased the content regardless of whether or not it was pirated.
Now, to own the content and make it available to others would be another matter as in this case one is offering it without authorization to others with the knowledge that some percentage of those would have purchased it otherwise.
Metta to all sentient beings
On the other hand though I don't pirate software or movies. Unlike most musicians, who are basically given a slave's wage, the people who create software and films are, for the most part, being given fair compensation by their employers. I have no problem supporting that. I do not, however, much care for paying between $16-$20 for a CD knowing that, at best, $0.50 of that is going to the creator and the rest is going into some suit's pocket. It would be different if these folks were given a livable wage by their label. As it is most have to take regular jobs when their not touring or recording and still can't afford things like insurance. When someone like Bruce Dickinson, of Iron Maiden (a band that's sold something like 80,000,000 records), is working a day job then something's seriously messed up there.
Sure you can complain that things are expensive, but seriously...we're not talking necessities here. Prove to me that you really, truly need that pirated movie or song, or that you need that pirated software, and maybe I'd be more forgiving. Like, say, if someone threatened to kill or rape you if you didn't pirate the thing. But seriously...how often will that happen? :rolleyes:
The only problem here is that there is no guarantee that the person would have purchased the thing if they did not download it. I don't buy the argument that pirating necessarily leads to a loss of income.
Agreed. This is what content producers do not seem to get no matter how many studies show the reality.
Executives of video game companies regularly talk trash about the fact that people who buy the games new can sell them to a store that then sells them used for less money. They seem to not understand that the ability to sell a game boosts the new game market as it reduces the risk to those shelling out full price for a game they may not like. If it sucks, they sell it and thus their cost/risk is reduced.
Here is a case in point. I like to take pictures and then edit them. I heard about this product called Adobe Photoshop. I wanted to try it out. I then saw I would have to pay at least $600 for it. I am just a poor shmuck, not a pro with a company to pay for it. I would never buy this software due to it's cost.
Instead I downloaded an 'illegal' copy for free.
I used it for awhile, appreciated it's power, but also realized it was far more complicated to get the wanted results from than I cared to deal with. I still have it, but don't use it.
Did my illegal download deprive anyone of anything? Of course not.
I wasn't about to shell out $600 for any software let alone one that just lets me tinker with pictures.
Having used the software I still won't pay $600 for it as it's too complicated for me to bother with.
What did the publisher/development studio lose by my downloading a free copy? Nothing. They never had a prayer of my buying their hideously overpriced, overly complicated software.
Had I liked it I probably would have paid for it eventually and instead of calling it over priced and overly complicated on this forum I would say instead it's pricey, but well worth it and an additional sale or 2 would get made.
Not telling anyone else what to think, but when I read the post by the wanna be content producer all I think is, you just don't get the way the market works. If you were the CEO of an old company you might survive to retirement, but to start up today? Get used to standing in lines. The unemployment line and the food kitchen line.
Metta to all sentient beings
Metta to all sentient beings
Mtns
Metta to all sentient beings
They also don't seem to realize that most people who sell/trade in used games do so to get cash/credit to purchase new games with. Like I did when God of War III was released. I was terribly short on cash at that time, so I traded in two games (that I had purchased new) and got store credit to help pay for GoW3. So Sony (in particular Sony, as they published all three games) got three sales from me where had I not done that they would have only gotten two. I read Tycho's comments on this subject over at Penny Arcade the other day, and his comments reflect what a lot of gamer developers/publishers say. While I like the Penny Arcade guys I couldn't disagree with him more here, and I'm not comfortable with his (and game maker's) equating the First Sale Doctrine with theft.
I'm no fan of gigantic corporations and their endless, relentless profit motive, but just because it's a big company, or just because they price things out of your (or anyone's) budget is not an excuse to steal. Where does a "large" corporation start and a "small" corporation end? The line is pretty fuzzy, don't you agree? Is it okay to steal from a "large" corporation, but not okay to steal from a "small" corporation? What if it were a sole proprietor (a one-person company), but you just happened not to like they way the person did business, or how much they charged for their product? Would it be okay to steal from them? If not, why not? See what I mean? It's a very, very slippery slope.
The best way to express your displeasure with mega-corporations is simply to not do business with them. Don't steal from them, but don't do business with them either. I haven't bought a drop of Exxon fuel since 1989 (Exxon Valdez disaster). I don't set foot in Wal-Mart (I don't like the way they treat their employees). And I won't ever buy another drop of BP fuel from here on out. Those are major examples from my life.
Mtns
Mtns
I'm not going to let the industry tell me how to concieve of it! I buy stuff from small labels and download stuff from big labels for free.. I really have no compassion for a gigantic organisation who are quite happy to screw people over in getting their money, wheras I do have compassion for a smaller orginisation or artist trying to make their way in the world... and surely the precepts are based on compassion...
Tell me *exactly* where you draw the line, and how you go about determining where that is? What is your specific proof that "big" corporations (all of them, since you seem to be lumping them all together) "screw people over". No corporation gets my money unless I give it to them. As far as I'm aware, Wal-Mart is not invading my bank account and taking my money without my permission.
As I said above, you can justify all you want, but wrong is still wrong, and even if a mega-corporation *is* (and they definitely are) criminal, do two wrongs EVER make a right?
Remember, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
It pains me not a little bit how many people that frequent this forum see nothing wrong with this practice. I guess that's emblematic of the way our society is in the 21st Century.
Mtns
Oh, and I do apologize if my utilizing torrent programs causes you distress.
You are right two wrongs do not make a right its true, but you have to really convince yourself that you are doing something fundamentally wrong when you download copyrighted material without paying. I do not think I really believe that I am doing something that is so wrong. If I am then I guess I will leave it to my karma to judge me not a multi-national corporation.
Metta to all sentient beings
Mtns
That said, I don't consider burning a cd of MP3s that I've legally purchased for friends to be a violation of the precept, though, even if it's technically illegal. My rationale is that I've purchased these files, and they're mine to do with as I please.
I undertake the item of training which consists in
abstention from taking the not-given.
I have started a thread on this
http://newbuddhist.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7131
Well technically speaking I am not taken what is not given, It has been given by the person who uploaded the material, am I right ?
Presumably somewhere down the line someone owned the original version, and decided to share it with other people, so whats wrong with that ?
Why should I be blamed for stealing when clearly it is something which has been shared with by the owner of the original version. If these record and movie companies had their way you wouldn't be allowed to whistle a tune without paying a royalty for it. They are greedy, and I reinstate I don't believe I am doing anything wrong or breaking any precepts for example when I watch a movie online.
But I am sure the corporations would disagree.
If my actions were contributing to the suffering of any sentient being then I would stop doing it. But as I see it only the bank balance of multi million pound companies are caused suffering. Again let my karma judge me on this I am confident that I am doing nothing wrong or breaking any precepts in any fundamental way.
Metta to all sentient beings
Back in the day, when cassettes were still commonplace, I use to do a lot of tape trading. If I had an album that a friend wanted I'd dub a copy for them, and vice-versa. Sometimes, if I liked an album well enough and wanted the real deal, I'd go out and buy the CD (in one particular case I've bought such an album not only on CD, but later on vinyl as well). In a nutshell I view file-sharing as essentially the same thing. Different methods, but the same principal.
At any rate I'm not going to attempt to moralize file-sharing. The technology is there, I take advantage of it. Just as I did with cassettes back in the day. That said, I don't do it nearly as much as I use to, but chiefly because there's less music that I'm really interested in these days. That's really more due to changing tastes on my part than anything. As I said before, I'm more likely to buy from indie artists and especially artists who self release. This has less to do with refusing to support "evil" corporations (afterall, Sony, via through their Playstation division, gets a fair amount of my money), and more to do with the idea that I want my money to go to places where I know the artist is going to get a fair amount of it.
The band Porcupine Tree is another example. I like this band quite a lot, one of my favorites now. Admittedly I've downloaded several of their albums (released through major labels such as Atlantic and Roadrunner, both divisions of Warner Music Group), but I've bought some releases that they've put out on their own label, and last year I spent $80 for my wife and I to see them in concert (and concert revenues are really most bands' bread and butter in the first place).