How does a streaming service, where you pay a blanket cost instead of choosing individual media, prove people were willing to buy individual media? Do you think the advent of streaming services maybe offer3d the convenience of a bunch of stuff right there to go, instead of having to compile it yourself? I think thats where the true value was.
So you’re admitting that when given an easy, affordable way to access media, people chose to pay rather than pirate? Congratulations, you just proved my point.
The fact that convenience was a key factor doesn’t change the reality that these services turned former pirates into paying customers. If piracy wasn’t causing financial harm, and if people truly ‘weren’t going to buy it anyway,’ then streaming services wouldn’t have reclaimed those users as paying subscribers.
As for your last line—sounds like you cut off mid-thought. You were about to say something profound about why sneaking into a concert isn’t theft? Go on, I could use the laugh
No, they turned a shitty service into a good one and the pirates were willing to pay for the platform to access that media rather than surf the seven seas looking all over the place. It wasn’t the media itself that turned them into paying customers, so the record labels and movie studios dont have a point. It was the unified service that brought them in and how cheap it was. As soon as the price raised, the catalogue changed, everyone who was previously a pirate dusted their hats and wind jammers off again and left.
Listening to music isnt theft. You could argue that you are stealing the experience being provided, but you just sound like a stuffy cock saying that shit. Nobody, including the band if they are chill, cares that a few people snuck in, not even other attendees. If you do care so much, then you need some introspection.
Just to be clear, I don’t actually care about piracy. Do it or don’t, that’s your business. But saying piracy doesn’t cause losses is just wrong.
You just explained that when piracy was inconvenient, people chose to pay for a better service. That means they had money to spend but were pirating instead—until a better legal option came along. That alone proves piracy takes money away from creators.
And your concert take? Now we’re at ‘stealing is fine as long as nobody makes a big deal about it.’ If sneaking in isn’t theft, does that mean shoplifting is fine too as long as the store doesn’t notice?
Keep going, or don’t—this is an imperfect analogy, I was just trying to help you see why you are so staggeringly wrong
So by your logic, if you pay for a stripper, you should own her for life? Or does paying for a temporary service not suddenly mean ‘ownership’ applies to everything?
Buying digital media means paying for licensed access (and to be fair, I miss buying the physical media because I got to keep it without interference, It doesn’t change anything about lost revenue), just like buying a ticket to a concert or hiring entertainment for a night. That doesn’t mean you ‘own’ the performer or the venue—it means you paid for the experience.
Piracy, meanwhile, is just skipping the payment entirely. Hope that helps!
Its about enshittacation. Everything we “own” online only becomes worse over time and permanently advertised buys are actually just temporary. Hope that helps!
It the same as sharing media with a friend. Also culture shouldn’t only be available for those with money
Piracy is a lot of work. If they had better product people wouldn’t do it
It’s not about enshitification at all? It’s all about the point that piracy causes losses. Nothing else. Of course if piracy didn’t cause any losses, no one in the industry would actually be against it. Me, I’m all for it. For all the reasons stated in this thread for some reason. But I’m not sure why anyone keeps bringing it up, as the only talking point is that it fucking causes losses to the producers.
If the creators themselves dont care, and the band is an especially bad example, the only people who give a fuck are shitheads like Metallica, you should take them for what they are and be happy people are enjoying your creation. Brendan Urie said it best, “pirate it, I dont care”. You’re acting like piracy always results in nobody ever paying and the creators or solemn victims of a ruthless tidal wave. Thats never true. They still sell, its not even a drop in the bucket compared to actual sales. This is like Musk running around screeching about 8bil when the government has a budget of over 2 trillion dollars, you’re bitching about couch change.
How does a streaming service, where you pay a blanket cost instead of choosing individual media, prove people were willing to buy individual media? Do you think the advent of streaming services maybe offer3d the convenience of a bunch of stuff right there to go, instead of having to compile it yourself? I think thats where the true value was.
And sneaking into a concert isnt theft.
So you’re admitting that when given an easy, affordable way to access media, people chose to pay rather than pirate? Congratulations, you just proved my point.
The fact that convenience was a key factor doesn’t change the reality that these services turned former pirates into paying customers. If piracy wasn’t causing financial harm, and if people truly ‘weren’t going to buy it anyway,’ then streaming services wouldn’t have reclaimed those users as paying subscribers.
As for your last line—sounds like you cut off mid-thought. You were about to say something profound about why sneaking into a concert isn’t theft? Go on, I could use the laugh
No, they turned a shitty service into a good one and the pirates were willing to pay for the platform to access that media rather than surf the seven seas looking all over the place. It wasn’t the media itself that turned them into paying customers, so the record labels and movie studios dont have a point. It was the unified service that brought them in and how cheap it was. As soon as the price raised, the catalogue changed, everyone who was previously a pirate dusted their hats and wind jammers off again and left.
Listening to music isnt theft. You could argue that you are stealing the experience being provided, but you just sound like a stuffy cock saying that shit. Nobody, including the band if they are chill, cares that a few people snuck in, not even other attendees. If you do care so much, then you need some introspection.
Just to be clear, I don’t actually care about piracy. Do it or don’t, that’s your business. But saying piracy doesn’t cause losses is just wrong.
You just explained that when piracy was inconvenient, people chose to pay for a better service. That means they had money to spend but were pirating instead—until a better legal option came along. That alone proves piracy takes money away from creators.
And your concert take? Now we’re at ‘stealing is fine as long as nobody makes a big deal about it.’ If sneaking in isn’t theft, does that mean shoplifting is fine too as long as the store doesn’t notice?
Keep going, or don’t—this is an imperfect analogy, I was just trying to help you see why you are so staggeringly wrong
If buying isn’t owning, piracy isn’t stealing 😤
So by your logic, if you pay for a stripper, you should own her for life? Or does paying for a temporary service not suddenly mean ‘ownership’ applies to everything?
Buying digital media means paying for licensed access (and to be fair, I miss buying the physical media because I got to keep it without interference, It doesn’t change anything about lost revenue), just like buying a ticket to a concert or hiring entertainment for a night. That doesn’t mean you ‘own’ the performer or the venue—it means you paid for the experience.
Piracy, meanwhile, is just skipping the payment entirely. Hope that helps!
Its about enshittacation. Everything we “own” online only becomes worse over time and permanently advertised buys are actually just temporary. Hope that helps!
It the same as sharing media with a friend. Also culture shouldn’t only be available for those with money
Piracy is a lot of work. If they had better product people wouldn’t do it
It’s not about enshitification at all? It’s all about the point that piracy causes losses. Nothing else. Of course if piracy didn’t cause any losses, no one in the industry would actually be against it. Me, I’m all for it. For all the reasons stated in this thread for some reason. But I’m not sure why anyone keeps bringing it up, as the only talking point is that it fucking causes losses to the producers.
It’s more then a one dimensional issue. Life is about more then corporate profits dingus lol
If the creators themselves dont care, and the band is an especially bad example, the only people who give a fuck are shitheads like Metallica, you should take them for what they are and be happy people are enjoying your creation. Brendan Urie said it best, “pirate it, I dont care”. You’re acting like piracy always results in nobody ever paying and the creators or solemn victims of a ruthless tidal wave. Thats never true. They still sell, its not even a drop in the bucket compared to actual sales. This is like Musk running around screeching about 8bil when the government has a budget of over 2 trillion dollars, you’re bitching about couch change.