The Morality of Pirating Software/Music/Movies etc -- Your Opinions?

Let me start this off by ASKING you guys to refrain from listing or linking to any software/websites/other that provide a means or the knowledge to pirate software, music or anything else. Since pirating media is illegal, you may catch the proverbial beat down for doing so.

I had a hard time deciding where this was most appropriate, so I placed it in the Education and Media forum. Let's see if it stays here hahaha.


I, personally, have absolutely ZERO problem with pirating any sort of media.

While I certainly see where some people see it as wrong because it IS stealing, I simply do not see how anyone could EVER catch an episode of "MTV Cribs" and feel bad about getting a bit of free music/movies/other.

As far as software goes, if it weren't for software moguls being amongst the richest people on the planet, I don't really see how they are hurting AT ALL from my ripping a bit of their software from the net. Furthermore, any second thought that I may have is quickly erased by the FACT that MOST software we buy doesn't work anywhere NEAR as well as it should when you think about that price tag.

In regards to the music; Just seeing the way MOST musicians behave and the RIDICULOUSLY sized homes they live in (not to mention their 27 vehicles), I find it impossible to dredge even a minute amount of care out of myself when it comes to the "right and wrong" aspect of pirating music. The same goes for movies. Does ANYONE really need a home with 80 rooms and 20 different vehicles? A tennis court in the back yard? A golf course?


The only real misgiving I have when it comes to pirating software, is the impact it potentially has on those who actually shell out their hard earned dollars for the media in question. While I doubt those that put the media out there for us run into any REAL money losses as a result of piracy, I'm quite sure they use it as an excuse to perpetually rise costs of said media.



Perhaps those out there that make the biggest fuss about piracy should actually step back for a minute and realize that just MAYBE some people steal whatever because the price is just TOO DAMNED HIGH for most people (especially these days) to shell out for what most look at as "junk entertainment".

Perhaps if Windows was 80 bucks per copy instead of 200 - 600, people would actually be more open to purchasing it. Maybe if that CD was 8 bucks instead of 22, people might buy it rather than stealing it. Maybe if it didn't cost approximately 10 bucks for a popcorn, 7 bucks for a coke and 5 bucks for some old M&Ms, more people would go to the theater instead of grabbing the movie online.


In all reality, it's actually MORE convenient to actually do things the right way and purchase the media in question. However, convenience takes a back seat to price when your choices are do without, buy it or pay the bills.

Of course, that's just my opinion.

How do you guys feel about the issue?



Jasn

I realize that this is my first actual post on the site; However, I have been reading ATS since late 2003, and have really neglected taking part in the responding part of the boards, all due to, quite simply, not enough time. However, given my freedom for the days and weeks to come, coupled with my knowledge on morality, I figure a debate on morals is a great place to begin.


Let's first predicate why exactly the celebrities of not just the United States, but the globe receive such enormous amounts of money. Being Capitalism, and the acceptance of Capitalism by the populace. While the most poverty-stricken are given the option to break the Law edifice of society, in theft, murder or other illegal activities, it is so that they may survive.

But what has caused these individuals to fall to the bottom rung of society? It is Capitalism, so while this wonderful thing that Capitalism is-allegedly-it still is, paradoxically enough, allowing a beyond-wealthy sect of society to exist while a dehumanized, impoverished state does as well.

Yet we do nothing, and moreover we allow this Capitalism to proliferate. Now, I'm not here to argue that Capitalism is bad, in nature, Capitalism is the ultimate means of bettering society, unfortunately, the middle class allows Capitalism to become corrupt and perpetuate its evils. Where there are human beings closely resembling skeletons, the non-impoverished eat what they want, when they want, and where they want. Where there are those struggling to find safe places to sleep, the non-impoverished take for granted their comfort and safety.

You may be asking, "Why does this matter at all to pirating music/movies/video games/software?", you should comprehend the implciations of your own purchase of fast food, renting or going to the movies, or other items, mean that Capitalism may persist.

What your allowing of Capitalism means, is that you can not allow Capitalism to persist but be so willing to steal-The notion of stealing coming from Capitalism, the capitalism that you allow to grow exponentially, you can not both steal music/movies/etc. and support Capitalism. You must have one, or the other.

What this means, is that in order to avoid legal and/or moral repercussions of pirating music/movies/etc. You must tear down Capitalism, or the action of paying Celebrities asinine amounts of money.

So, in short, it's the will of the people that decides if pirating music/movies/etc. Is legally and/or morally acceptable.

It depends on what I am planning to download.

I almost never have second thought about movies, but when it comes to music; my conscience kicks in.

Although i feel far from bad from downloading say- the new 50 cent album or Kanye West, I do feel bad for more of the less popular musicians who put their heart into their work like Living Legends and Zion i.

reply to post by Zenskeptical


Just a reminder...

No personal experiences, please.

Arguing ethics and morality is fair game, but relating illegal activities is strictly forbidden.

2e.) Illegal Activity: Discussion of illegal activities; specifically mind-altering drugs, computer hacking, criminal hate, sexual relations with minors, and stock scams are strictly forbidden.

Although this is not my opinion, I had saved this a while back because I thought it was brilliant. (when I don't really have an opinion on something, I usually refer to people smarter than myself) The user in question has since made Mod. (no wonder) :

Originally posted by WyrdeOne

"If you're selling water in the desert, and one day it starts to rain, you don't appeal to the government to outlaw rain! You sell something else." - Ian Clarke (paraphrased)

...

If people want to take my work without paying for it, that's fine. Artists should never need more lawyers than criminals, and I just count myself lucky that the work is getting read.

for the rest of the post:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Remember way back when VCRs came out?I wonder how many folks have closets full of movies they recorded off of HBO and other movie channels.Its the same thing today with downloading movies off the internet.

reply to post by crowpruitt


Book publishers must've been really affraid when libraries started springing up in every major city. Read books for no money!?! Outrageous!

As someone who spent some time as a professional application developer, all I can say is that theft is theft, period. It does not matter how you try and sugarcoat, or justify why you are stealing, but ripping software is no different then shoplifting. It only seem like it is a victimless crime because you can do it from the comfort of your own home

Originally posted by crowpruitt
Remember way back when VCRs came out?I wonder how many folks have closets full of movies they recorded off of HBO and other movie channels.Its the same thing today with downloading movies off the internet.

This is not true, because it is the same as recording music off the radio. The royalties are paid to the company per play on air, and that includes the fact that listeners/viewers may record the media at lower quality then a purchased version. For example a radio station pays a royalty EVERY time a song is played, and they often cut into the music with station ID or advertising to lower the quality. Stations like HBO plug their logo in during shows to make it a lower quality then a purchased version, and similarly have to pay a royalty per play.


[edit on 12/12/2007 by defcon5]

I understand,thanks Defcon 5.I stand corrected.

I don't believe that all people download media to avoid paying the money. It is probably laziness. It is far quicker to download something than walk to the shop or wait for it to be delivered.

Those that do download media quite often do so at the expense of quality - software with trojans, terrible MP3 quality and the guy in the cinema who gets up for a pee while you are watching your cinema camcorder movie!

There is a pricing issue that needs addressing in certain areas of media distribution - i.e. cost of cinema tickets, DVDs and CDs. There is a plausible arguement that the structure of movie rollouts actually pushes people to seek pirated copies. For example, the timings between cinema release, dvd and satellite tv could be improved/speeded up. There is a need for change here but the money machine has big wheels and many protestations have fallen under it's wheels.

There should be more reward for the customer. Cinema tickets, for example, could be presented at the counter when purchasing a DVD of the same movie giving you money off.

Finally there is an issue with quality. If the distributors made more of an effort with packaging, media extras, vouchers etc. then there would be a greater temptation for the customer to trust spending their hard earned money on something tangible and rewarding rather than a lazy-no-thrills, same-as-all-the-rest product release.

Ultimately, the distributors have to make the legal product more appealing and less of a rip off. They have the money, artists and the marketing know how. They just need to understand that we want an excellent product for a reasonable dip in to our pockets.

[edit on 13/12/2007 by skibtz]

[edit on 13/12/2007 by skibtz]

Never felt bad about downloading anything.

This part of a South Park episode (Faith +1) is one of my favorite examples of why...


Mod Edit....excessively long quote removed

If I enjoy the product, I will purchase it to support the artist, but those are few and far between unfortunately. Maybe if I didn't have to spend my money on crap, and there was more quality product out there, than I might feel a shred of regret

[edit on 12/14/2007 by benevolent tyrant]

Originally posted by defcon5
It does not matter how you try and sugarcoat, or justify why you are stealing, but ripping software is no different then shoplifting.

I totally agree.

If you steal something and nobody knows about it, is it still theft? Yes.
If the person you steal from is rich beyond belief and will never notice it, is it still morally wrong? Yes.

It's not stealing if the artist says: If people want to take my work without paying for it, that's fine. They have just given consent. They have given it away.

Originally posted by Kronik98
If I enjoy the product, I will purchase it to support the artist, but those are few and far between unfortunately. Maybe if I didn't have to spend my money on crap, and there was more quality product out there, than I might feel a shred of regret

So, you listen to crappy music because it's free?

Or, do you download music to find out if you like it, then, if you do, you buy it?

Here's an interesting take on pirating.

Please note that even though there may be a marketing upside to the pirating phenomenon, it's still called stealing.

blogs.cnet.com...

[edit on 2007/12/16 by GradyPhilpott]

reply to post by GradyPhilpott


I usually download a song or two(or three) and if its something I'd listen to more than once, I'll usually buy the album. Movies I buy less often, but I still feel no remorse since their rich (movie stars, etc) and I'm not.

Call it a shovel

Originally posted by SimiusDei
I, personally, have absolutely ZERO problem with pirating any sort of media.

Clearly this is because you do not produce any yourself. Any worth stealing, at least.

As far as software goes, if it weren't for software moguls being amongst the richest people on the planet, I don't really see how they are hurting AT ALL... Just seeing the way MOST musicians behave and the RIDICULOUSLY sized homes they live in (not to mention their 27 vehicles)... The same goes for movies. Does ANYONE really need a home with 80 rooms and 20 different vehicles? A tennis court in the back yard? A golf course?

So your position is based on your envy of others' wealth. Charming.

I am a writer by profession. I am one of those who produce the intellectual property that people like you steal.

If you steal software, movies and video - as you have all but admitted you do - you are nothing but a common thief. Your post is merely an attempt to salve your uneasy conscience and give comfort to other common thieves like you.

I take comfort in the fact that your current practices will doubtless cause you to become very familiar with the inside of a prison cell at some time in your life. Roll on the day.

[edit on 16-12-2007 by Astyanax]

reply to post by defcon5

Originally posted by defcon5
As someone who spent some time as a professional application developer, all I can say is that theft is theft, period. It does not matter how you try and sugarcoat, or justify why you are stealing, but ripping software is no different then shoplifting. It only seem like it is a victimless crime because you can do it from the comfort of your own home

WHile I agree with you, and if I were in your position, I'd want compensation for copying my work, it brings up a question that has puzzled me for a long time:

I have at least a dozen very handy programs or routines on my PC that I downloaded for free off the net. No stealing involved. Stuff like Spybot.

How is it that some software is free when others feel the need to charge for it?

Originally posted by jsobecky
I have at least a dozen very handy programs or routines on my PC that I downloaded for free off the net. No stealing involved. Stuff like Spybot.

How is it that some software is free when others feel the need to charge for it?

Spybot was written by the German software engineer Patrick Michael Kolla, and is distributed by Kolla's Irish company Safer Networking Limited. Development began in 2000 when Kolla, still a student, wrote a small program to deal with the Aureate/Radiate and Conducent TimeSink programs, two of the earliest examples of adware.

Here is the difference right here, that being “garageware” vs. professionally written software. There is nothing stopping the average person writing software in their spare time from giving it away, or simply asking for a donation if they so wish. There are many types of compensation besides asking for money from the consumer themselves. Attaching advertising, or just getting your name out in the software arena may be compensation enough for many side venture, home developers. That changes in the professional arena because there is overhead in the bigger game. You have to pay the salaries of a team of personnel ranging from marketing to support, distribution, development, and so on. You also often have physical assets that have to be paid for, rent, electricity, computers, phones, and more. You cannot really compare an internet based home development business with a large professional developer, as they are two entirely different creatures.

[edit on 12/19/2007 by defcon5]

Piracy for me personally is a tricky issue. I try not to get ripped off and dont like ripping off others as well.

So if I needed a software that was $400 or more like some CAD programs etc, I'd never buy it because that price is unreasonable no matter how good the software is. On the other hand if I needed anti-virus software and the like I'd definitely spend about a $100 for it depending on how long they give me updates. I wouldnt steal it.

Music and video is a different matter. I have no problem listening to or watching a movie I downloaded but I'd definitely would never burn it on DVD or store it on my computer for any length of time. I'd buy it outright if I liked it enough to keep it, because I feel that even though the record labels and the movie houses are getting most of my money, I still feel the extra quality that the genuine product gives me is worth the money.

In the future, I think such a trend is going to continue. Already Universal Music has allowed all of their music to be heard on imeem.com which serves both as a marketing tool as well prevents people from really downloading the songs. Plus the labels can get money through ads and the like on the web page by allowing people to hear their music for free. Maybe this trend will continue and soon, all kinds of media will be available for free to sample and people who really like a product can then spend money on getting really high quality products that they really enjoy. Instead of the practise today of buying a CD for a song on it.