Fully disagree. The same as saying “why pay for bread, it’s already made”. You want to to say the workers should earn more, that is a separate conversation, but it’s a very wrong take to say that just because it is already means its worth nothing.
You can argue not paying anything at all which means even the workers is moral, which is actually my point. Maybe stop doing that.
You want to pirate? Go for it, but don’t act like you’re a saint for doing so. Yeah scrooge won’t get his 90%. Cratchit doesn’t get his 10% either.
If you actually cared about being moral you wouldn’t need to pirate because you wouldn’t partake at all, you wouldn’t watch any of it. That would be the actual moral path.
No, it’s like saying don’t use nestle products at all if you want to claim to be moral.
You’re arguing that you are moral by not paying for it while still chomping down on nestle chocolate. (And yes I know your follow up “but it’s still there I didn’t steal” that’s not the point)
I’m saying you can pirate, but you can’t also claim to be moral while doing it because the only moral option is to not use it at all. Go ahead, do what you like, but by using it at all its immoral.
The Baker baked the bread. If the baker is so evil and treats his workers so terribly, you aren’t exactly in the moral place by still eating his bread.
Actually I’m arguing that paying for it is immoral, and that I’m moral by not paying for it.
Consuming a product that you have not paid for is not inherently immoral, regardless of whether it’s bread or a movie.
Basically my argument is: it is immoral to needlessly funnel wealth towards billionaires, when that wealth could be distributed towards those who aren’t billionaires.
Not at all the same thing. Bread is a one-time consumable. A DVD can be used repeatedly and duplicated at virtually no cost. That’s why there’s no second-hand market for bread. I can’t believe I have to explain this.
I think we should look into Jesus. Pirating fish I mean didn’t he take like some fish and bread and somehow managed to feed a whole fucked ton of people. That mother fucker knew how to copy some shit. That gangster didn’t give a fuck about no copyright holders.
Fully disagree. The same as saying “why pay for bread, it’s already made”. You want to to say the workers should earn more, that is a separate conversation, but it’s a very wrong take to say that just because it is already means its worth nothing.
if you take the bread, the guy have one bread less. If you copy a file… you have 2 files.
Again, that’s irrelevant for what I’m saying. we’re talking about a product that was made ahead of time, people made it.
Who do you think pays the people?
billionaire corposluts
You can argue that ultimately we pay the billionaire corposluts, which actually is my point. Maybe stop doing that.
You can argue not paying anything at all which means even the workers is moral, which is actually my point. Maybe stop doing that.
You want to pirate? Go for it, but don’t act like you’re a saint for doing so. Yeah scrooge won’t get his 90%. Cratchit doesn’t get his 10% either.
If you actually cared about being moral you wouldn’t need to pirate because you wouldn’t partake at all, you wouldn’t watch any of it. That would be the actual moral path.
Scrooge already paid everyone for the movie.
It’s like saying “nooo don’t steal Nestle products, the workers need to be paid”
No, it’s like saying don’t use nestle products at all if you want to claim to be moral.
You’re arguing that you are moral by not paying for it while still chomping down on nestle chocolate. (And yes I know your follow up “but it’s still there I didn’t steal” that’s not the point)
I’m saying you can pirate, but you can’t also claim to be moral while doing it because the only moral option is to not use it at all. Go ahead, do what you like, but by using it at all its immoral.
The Baker baked the bread. If the baker is so evil and treats his workers so terribly, you aren’t exactly in the moral place by still eating his bread.
Actually I’m arguing that paying for it is immoral, and that I’m moral by not paying for it.
Consuming a product that you have not paid for is not inherently immoral, regardless of whether it’s bread or a movie.
Basically my argument is: it is immoral to needlessly funnel wealth towards billionaires, when that wealth could be distributed towards those who aren’t billionaires.
Digital piracy has no scarcity, and the bread has already been eaten, and the leftover bread is going to be thrown in the trash.
Not at all the same thing. Bread is a one-time consumable. A DVD can be used repeatedly and duplicated at virtually no cost. That’s why there’s no second-hand market for bread. I can’t believe I have to explain this.
I think we should look into Jesus. Pirating fish I mean didn’t he take like some fish and bread and somehow managed to feed a whole fucked ton of people. That mother fucker knew how to copy some shit. That gangster didn’t give a fuck about no copyright holders.
“very interesting… are you planning to include ads in that?” -business executives, probably.