this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2025
779 points (96.3% liked)

Piracy: κœ±α΄€Ιͺʟ α΄›Κœα΄‡ ʜΙͺɒʜ κœ±α΄‡α΄€κœ±

62574 readers
893 users here now

βš“ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules β€’ Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

πŸ“œ c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

πŸ΄β€β˜ οΈ Other communities

FUCK ADOBE!

Torrenting/P2P:

Gaming:


πŸ’° Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] k1ck455kc@sh.itjust.works 77 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (29 children)

Disclosure: I have been sailing the seas for years, but...

This logic does no justice to the objective financial harm being done to the creators/owners of valuable data/content/media.

The original creator/owner is at a loss when data is copied. The intent of that data is to be copied for profit. Now that the data has been copied against the creator/owners will, they do not receive the profit from that copy.

Yes yes the argument is made that the pirate would not have bought the copy anyways, but having free copies of the content available on the internet decreases the desire for people to obtain paid copies of the data. At the very least it gives people an option not to pay for the data, which is not what the creator wanted in creating it. They are entitled to fair compensation to their work.

It is true that pirating is not directly theft, but it does definitely take away from the creator's/distributor's profit.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 101 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Devil's Advocate: Many pirates would have not paid for access to that media so to say it takes away from the creators profit isn't exactly true since one act of piracy does not equal one lost sale.

Devil's Advocate Part II: There is s significant amount of research that supports the notion that pirates actually spend more money on media than the average person.

I personally am an example of part II. I pirate a lot of music but I refuse to use Spotify because of how little it pays artists and I have also spent significant amounts of money buying music from artists I enjoy via Bandcamp or buying from the artist directly because I know they get a bigger cut of the profits that way.

[–] john_lemmy@slrpnk.net 52 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ironically, piracy develops more ethical consumers

[–] IllNess@infosec.pub 29 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because people don't want to pay for shit content. Let's take pirating out of the equation. If I read a book I borrowed and I really like it, I would buy. If the content was trash then I wouldn't. Same goes if I watch a movie, listen to an album, or eat a microwavable burrito at a friend's or family member's house.

[–] blaze@programming.dev 13 points 1 day ago

This is what I do. I don't want to get burned by a shitty product.

[–] tenchiken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Ditto on Spotify. I have big love for piracy of FLAC for my personal music server, but I also have a decent rack filled with physical offerings from my favorite bands.

My Bandcamp collection is also getting up there, since a few of my favs say they are treated well there, and it's FLAC friendly as well.

Physical media or merch directly from the band is absolutely the way to go every time if possible.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I'm having trouble finding a link to substantiate it, but I remember in the early 2000's a group of artists having to sue their record labels because of the lawsuits on file-sharing users. The record labels said they were doing it for the artists, but the artists had to sue the record labels to even ever see a penny from the fruits of those lawsuits. The record labels were just pocketing the money for themselves while saying it was "for the artists."

Anyway, long story short is that kind of behavior from the recording industry made me want to give money directly to the artists and cut out these selfish middlemen who did nothing but claimed all the profits.

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Surely you’re not saying that record labels are dishonest?!

collapsed inline media

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tenchiken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 45 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

Cool argument, except a huge quantity of pirated works aren't "owned" by the creator or even a group that funded it, but instead by parasitic companies that abuse capitalistic tools to actually steal value from those creators.

I have thousands of purchased games. 3 categories here:

1: obtained as part of a pack (humble gog etc)

2: purchased AFTER trying out via pirate copy to know if it is my kind of thing

3: picked up early access due to demo or general interest from being a known smaller dev/studio (hare brained for example)

With less and less access to shareware and viable demos, piracy is often the only conduit to prevent me getting ripped off of $80 for something that looks like a shiny sports car but end up being another "buy $800 in dlc for the full story!" Ford pinto.

Additionally, I now flat refuse to fund the likes of Denuvo, and wish that piracy actively hurt the bottom line of companies deploying that kind of anti-user shit.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] greenskye@lemmy.zip 31 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Piracy is somewhat similar to vigilantism to me. My ability to consider it a negative is directly related to how fair I consider the legitimate methods available to be.

If similar efforts were focused on consumer protection laws as we do IP protection, I don't think pirates would have much leg to stand on, and they'd be seen in more of a negative light.

But since consumers are regularly fucked by corporations, all I see is two sides both doing bad shit and I'm not feeling all that charitable for the faceless megacorp. I also dislike pirates who pirate from small time creators. But that's about as far as I can care given the state of things.

We should be focusing on stronger consumer rights to truly fix the problem for all sides.

There is absolutely a connection between how shitty corporations are treating their customers with how likely those customers are likely to stop paying and start sailing.

Netflix in its prime was the GOAT, showing a very significant decrease in piracy. We're only seeing a rise now because of the proliferation of streaming companies. No one wants to pay for 4+ streaming services.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] FUCKING_CUNO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

having free copies of the content available on the internet decreases the desire for people to obtain paid copies of the data.

According to who?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] taco@piefed.social 14 points 1 day ago (5 children)

This logic does no justice to the objective financial harm being done to the creators/owners of valuable data/content/media.

It does though, since no harm is being done.

The original creator/owner is at a loss when data is copied. The intent of that data is to be copied for profit. Now that the data has been copied against the creator/owners will, they do not receive the profit from that copy.

They also don't receive profit from not copying, unless there's a purchase made. By your logic, watching something on Netflix or listening to it on the radio is actively harmful to creators, which I think most people can admit is absurd.

but having free copies of the content available on the internet decreases the desire for people to obtain paid copies of the data.

You made this assertion, but don't really back it up. If you were correct here, being able to copy cassette tapes or burn cds would have killed the music industry decades ago. Piracy is the original grassroots promotional method.

At the very least it gives people an option not to pay for the data, which is not what the creator wanted in creating it.

That's a separate argument and doesn't relate at all to the supposed financial harm.

They are entitled to fair compensation to their work.

That's a loaded assertion. If I sing a song right now, what am I entitled to be paid for it? And you're ignoring that most of the "work" of being a musician (in most genres at least) is playing live performances, the experience of which cannot be pirated.

It is true that pirating is not directly theft, but it does definitely take away from the creator's/distributor's profit.

I don't think it's definite at all. Most of what musicians make these days is from merch and ticket sales, which piracy contributes to by bringing in new fans.

load more comments (5 replies)

Corporations profiting from copyright laws they helped write deserve to have their profits stolen in any case. Not gonna lose any sleep over it.

load more comments (23 replies)
[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 46 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I wouldnt download a car, but that's only because im fanatically anti car.

Because cars are bad. There should not be cars.

[–] pdqcp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Would you download a train?

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 35 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes. Yesyesyesyesyes. Fuck yes.

[–] axEl7fB5@lemmy.cafe 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

But would you download a bus?

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Depends on file size, and if the train download is done.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de 25 points 22 hours ago

I am subscribed to a train

[–] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I for one would definitely download a car, if I did not already own one I really like.

I'd happily let's others download mine, if it didn't affect me or my car in any way.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 24 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

The only damage that exists from piracy is to the copyright holders profits.....

Since the copyright holder is usually a corporation that is owned by shareholders, the majority of which are richer than all of us combined, ask me if I give a shit and I will show you my field of shits to give, and you will see that it is barren.

Eat the rich. Or Luigi them... I don't care.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 21 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (7 children)

The problem with almost every pro-piracy argument like this is that they fundamentally require a significant percentage of the population to disagree with it. "People who can pay will pay and I'm not taking anything from them" only works for as long as both the general population and retailers regard piracy as wrong and keep funding all those games, movies etc for you.

Heck, all you pirates should be upvoting anti-piracy posts like this, we're the ones keeping your habit funded...

[–] Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

The idea is that you support creators out of the appreciation and not because you're forced to.
This seems to work as a model for YouTubers and podcasters. They usually have most of their stuff available for free, and people pay them money, and more often than there is no reward for the money, other than satisfaction of supporting the creator.
This is obviously one example, and it only works for periodic installments, but it is a working alternative to the system, where people who don't want or can't pay don't do that

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (4 children)

Nah. Id pay artists if i could.

And in fact do tip them pretty well at the jobs they take to pay rent when im in LA.

What we need is for parasitic creativity destroying shit stain ip-troll ghouls to get the guillotine, so they arent parasiting on every fucking artist.

We need a society that values humanity and art.

Because as is, there kind of isnt a reliable systemic way to support them. Capitalism prevents it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Azzu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

You forget the alternative mindset:

An active desire to see traditional ways of funding to disappear, and the media along with it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 10 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

Nah, I want all those companies to burn. If they can't afford to make new stuff because of piracy then there won't be stuff to pirate. I am totally fine with that. There is a life to live beyond just consumption, you know?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] limer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 1 day ago (5 children)

I attempted to download a car once, but front wheel got stuck in my router. Was huge mess

I'm picturing a guy sighing with his hands on his head, staring at most of a car with the front wheel stuck in the router. Like, he can figure this out, just give him a minute. Maybe he needs a walk to clear his head. The pieces are there.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] django@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

I'd rather download some bicycles, but yes.

I wished, we could pirate food.

[–] hsdkfr734r@feddit.nl 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Pff. You really think food grows on trees?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] frenchfryenjoyer@lemmings.world 18 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

I just got reminded of that sick anti piracy ad that would play before every film back in the 2000s lol

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 20 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

YoU WoUlDn'T dOwNlOaD A Car!?!?!

You're damn right I would; get me a 3D printer big enough...

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] SayJess@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (37 children)

The amount of people that take these moral high roads is fucking ridiculous.

Well, the faceless mega-corp made it difficult to purchase or stream

I don’t like that I have to play the game on Steam

Akshually I’m just copying it, so it’s not theft

There are too many streaming services, so I shouldn’t have to pay for ANOTHER service

I’m not depriving the content creator or publisher from any money, since I wasn’t going to pay for it regardless

Just fucking own up to it. You are downloading content that you did not pay for. I don’t take some enlightened stance when I download a movie; I just do it. What I’m doing is not right, but I still do what I do. I don’t try to justify it with some bullshit political take.

We all have our line on what we deem acceptable or not. The only piracy that, in my opinion, could have a leg to stand on is when it is actual lost media. No physical copies available, no way to stream or pay for it. Anything else is just the lies we tell ourselves to justify our actions.

Just admit that you could pay for the content if you wanted to, you just choose not to, because you are a pirate. You are depriving someone somewhere from a sale or some other form of revenue.

Edit: I worded β€œJust own it” poorly. Clarified it to β€œJust own up to it”. That was the original intent, just an oversight on my part.

[–] zeca@lemmy.eco.br 22 points 22 hours ago

I think pirating scientific papers is a good thing all around. The research isnt funded by the selling of access to those papers, much on the contrary.

[–] Squirrelanna@lemmynsfw.com 15 points 23 hours ago

Just admit that you could pay for the content if you wanted to, you just choose not to, because you are a pirate. You are depriving someone somewhere from a sale or some other form of revenue.

I usually can't, actually. Not immediately anyway. But that doesn't stop me from paying for it when I can. Done it with plenty of games. And if I didn't have that option, which I primarily use for games I'm not entirely sure I'll stick with, well... I just wouldn't buy it. Full stop. Wouldn't be a consideration at all. There is no lost sale here, only the potential to fall in love with it enough to buy it when I eventually can.

Not saying this is some moral high ground. It's not. But plenty of folks just can't afford to gamble on whether or not they like something and end up paying it forward when they can.

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 1 day ago (5 children)

When I return from the library instead of the bookstore it is with the deepest shame.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (34 replies)
[–] axEl7fB5@lemmy.cafe 15 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

Just pirate shit bruh like what Jessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone said. Y'all keep yapping about ethics and shit but still proceed to do it nonetheless.

[–] Vespair@lemmy.zip 13 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

I don't even call it piracy, because piracy has a definition that this doesn't meet. I call it what it is: unauthorized reproduction. That's it. That's all "piracy" is, it's literally just unauthorized reproduction. Doesn't sound nearly as scary and dramatic when you call it what it actual is, does it?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next β€Ί