[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [s4s] [vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/g/ - Technology



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: piracy.webm (266 KB, 852x480)
266 KB
266 KB WEBM
Why is this illegal again?
>>
Because cake B isn't profitable for the dude that invested to make the cake A
>>
You have to understand the concept of intellectual property to answer this question.
>>
>>59998420
>Too retarded to understand the concept of intellectual property.
>>
>>59998494
>>59998488
Surely only the intellect that created the property can claim that?
>>
>>59998420
It isn't.
>>
>>59998420
Because using legislation is how the state protects certain industries and interests of investors and creators.

The reason to do this is twofold:
1) publishing industry, investors and various creators benefic directly. These people are a minority of the population, but they are fairly influential and therefore can help politicians with their political survival.
2) This policy arguably benefits the society by encouraging innovation, therefore many voters support at least some kind of IP laws.
>>
>>59998782
How do piracy policies encourage innovation?
>>
>>59998420
Because BILLIONS of dollars isn't enough for the filthy kikes.
>>
>>59998476
>destroying monopolies is a bad thing
really makes you think...
>>
>>59998420
Cause pedowood needs more money to mack kids
>>
>>59998795
intent =/= result
>>
same reason why nobody lets you copy their homework
>>
>>59998795
Sorry, I kinda mixed arguments for IP and patent law together. Indeed IP laws do not encourage innovation as in inventing stuff. But the general argument is that they do encourage to create new artworks because you will be able to cash in on them for a long time (if, of course, the public likes it).
>>
>>59998420
Because it takes a lot more time and money to make large scale proprietary software than it does to copy a brownie recipe.
>>
>>59998892
Just to add: the question if that is the actual effect of IP laws is debatable, but I was merely saying that many people believe this and, as a reault, this is one of the reasons why piracy is illegal.
>>
>>59998890
because the teachers tell you not to?
>>
>>59998420
>Why is this illegal again?

Because it's profitable to people with power and influence. Much worse things are made with banking and nobody cares.

Then they spin some excuse about R&D and shit (never mind all that research funded via taxes and then privatized and patented).
>>
>>59998420
What is /g/'s stance on theatre hopping?
>>
Because people being able to profit from copyable work is what drives economies.

Laws don't protect people. Laws protect the interests of the State. It's much like all of us with jobs here know to never, ever talk to HR. We understand whose agenda they support.

This is ultimately a practical solution with an ethical tragedy.
>>
>>59998952
cause other used their precious time to solve it and you just want to copy shit without effort

sure friends will let you copy but its not just time that was invested in things you pirate, its all about money
>>
File: beat that clown.png (232 KB, 494x340)
232 KB
232 KB PNG
>>59998890
The bastard nerds who put their leather combination lock suitcases into the middle of the table during exams so you couldn't peek and copy their answers were always the ones who ate the most knuckle sandwiches on the schoolyard later on.
>>
>>59998992
A douchebag thing to do but it's never stopped me
>>
>>59998890
I let people copy my homework, I'm fine with it until someone is retarded enough to get caught. I'd be fine with letting someone cheat on my tests too, with the same constraints.
Ultimately, when it comes down to it, if a person doesn't really know about something, they're not gonna get far. If cheating helps them learn, power to them.
>>
>>59998476
Why do you hate free markets?
>>
File: 1491781634327.png (221 KB, 793x794)
221 KB
221 KB PNG
Why do retarded statists hate free markets so much?

Free markets have no IP, copyright or patents.

You can do whatever the fuck you want.

Only marxist shitstains would be against this.
>>
File: 50432985723049857345.jpg (46 KB, 730x780)
46 KB
46 KB JPG
On what planet do you need to live on to justify piracy to yourself with these mental gymnastics. Just admit you don't wanna pay for it and be done, fuck.

Intellectual property is important and people who pretend software is the same as physical goods are in a fantasy land.
>put in effort that is mostly man hours
>you now need to sell product at twenty dollars to recoup the man hours
>everyvody just pirates it and your profits tank forcing you towards drm

It's one of the few sensible market regulations and I think you'd be hard pressed to find any libertarian against it unless we're talking meme AnCap fucks.

That being said however our copy right laws are absolutely fucked and somebody needs to d something about itb
>>
File: ss13 engineer.jpg (94 KB, 500x456)
94 KB
94 KB JPG
>>59999288
How about instead of banking on extortion strats of nobody being able to sell your invention except for you or get dick-slapped by the law, you instead actually get paid mad moolah for actually dev'ing the thing by a grateful community, then continuously improving it?

Stop selling items, sell service. Patreon masturbation-fodder artists got the right idea, now programmers and engineers just need to catch up.
>>
Cake A was created using techniques created by the greater society not just magically thought up from no cultural influence. I personally wouldn't really consider that to be intellectual property. Physical property? Yes. But he made a copy and didn't steal the original.
>>
>>59999356
Because a man who pays for something he doesn't yet have is a fool. Let's take a quick peek at kickstarter and all those failed projects where they took the money and laughed all the way to the bank. I don't disagree that its the worst way or anything (discord was an invested project and honestly it does a great job and is making Microsoft squirm) but it presents it's own problems.

But then I also would extend this to the fact that a man who works for the promise of pay is also a fool, so it's kind of a shit situation where nobody wins.

The thing about intellectual property laws is that preventing piracy doesn't necessarily disqualify either suggestion of making it irrelevant. It's still easily put into practice, but nobody does because it's easier to sell the final product over a service claiming "yeah man trust us it will be great!"
>>
>>59999356
>you instead actually get paid mad moolah for actually dev'ing the thing by a grateful community
If the community is grateful, but doesn't need to pay for the product, why would they?

You can be grateful for something, and also simply take it for free if it is "free".
>>
>>59999288
I can garuntee you people creating intellectual "property" didn't come up with their ideas without any sort of cultural influence. Shouldn't we have to pay everyone that inspired the work too? Or just the compilers of other peoples ideas?
>>
>>59999464
>Discord is making Microsoft squirm

What makes you think this? They aren't a competitor to Microsoft.
>>
If you do that at the store and walk away with your extra chocolate bar, the confectioner doesn't get your money and they get that much less back from their hard work. If lots of people do it, they make less and less money, and eventually have no motivation to produce chocolate. Piracy does have legitimate potential to harm industries, but the scale it currently happens at isn't quite enough to do too much real harm. The music industry got their shit figured out with streaming services, which video content producers apparently can't into because muh cable and muh box office. Video games, on the other hand, are scrambling for a way to deal with piracy, and dooming the industry to a future of freemium bullshit seems like the answer at the moment.
>>
>>59999464
That's what trust based economies like we've seen all over the internet in the new age are for. That's why Amazon and Ebay and Aliexpress conditioned us into looking for the seller with the most stars and thumbs-up. It's just that most retards totally forgot that they should have done this on Kickstarter just as much. But they didn't, and that's their problem, not mine. If the dev is a known retard or an unknown number, why would I invest?

Trust is worth more than money, because money is nothing but an attempt to make trust solid and clutchable. Welcome to reinventing the wheel as far as economy and financial systems go. God bless the internet.
>>
Good bait thread OP
>>
>>59999511
You sound like an anti-capitalist, desu. Not entirely a bad thing, but hardcore supporters of the free market in its current form don't give a shit about any of that. The fact that Walmart is still in business should prove as proof enough of that.
>>
>>59998420
Fuck you, now I'm hungry
>>
>>59999486
They've completely replaced Skype for group messaging and voice chat. And they're rolling out video calling soon so Skype won't even be good for that.
On top of that, not even businesses use Skype for conference calls anymore because it's so fucking unreliable. So Skype has lost the only people who still use it to Discord
>>
TFW hacker ideals trigger the corporate slaves who worship McDonalds and Time Warner as some sort of god.

Don't worry we will free you too. Even if you don't understand our methods just yet.
>>
>>59999563
Where the hell have you been? Tech illiterates and tweens have been the only Skype users for the past three or four years. Between Hangouts(RIP), FB Messenger, and Snapchat, Skype has been almost completely supplanted on all platforms.
>>
>>59999526
Fuck yeah I bated
>>
>>59999563
If anything, they've replaced Teamspeak, Ventrilo, and Slack.

Microsoft literally doesn't even care about this anyway. Skype for Business is included with business O365 subscriptions, and plenty of companies still use it.

Either way, it's a moot point because Skype is insignificant to Microsoft in comparison to any of their main offerings, which primarily include: licensing for Windows Server, SQL Server, Exchange, and Active directory; Office 365 subs, enterprise and personal; and the behemoth that is Azure.

Frankly, I don't remember a time in recent memory where there was a significant amount of Discord's target audience using Skype; the only people I know who used Skype for gaming are like 18-21 right now. Teamspeak was king most recently, and Ventrilo was the standard before that.
>>
>>59999594
Actually, it makes far more sense to let them suffer while we triumph. Just to show people who is right and who is wrong. Like how America invested fuckloads of money to Worst Korea to show that Calitalism just werks against Communism.
>>
>>59999594
AI-induced socialism via rendering human workers obsolete is not a sustainable market system.
We'll pretty much lose creatives entirely without working stiffs to pay them, and anybody who "falls through the cracks" in the socioeconomic sub-hierarchy that forms to ensure the provision of basic needs and fair distribution of bot-produced resources will be fucked. Plus, nobody trusts AI, and many never will. There will be riots like we've never seen in the years leading up to it.
And no, the singularity will not fix that shit. Nobody actually wants The Matrix.
Prove me wrong.
>>
>>729987725
Like most laws it has to do with moneis
>>
File: power of money.gif (2.97 MB, 295x221)
2.97 MB
2.97 MB GIF
>>59999545
No, I mean this in an exactly capitalist manner. It just doesn't sound like it very much because this is taking capitalism so far back to the roots that people barely recognize it as such anymore.

Once upon a time, you had to pay for stuff in gold and silver coins. Some fat fucks got tired of lugging physical tons of material around and constantly getting robbed because of it, so they decided: hey, what if we just lock up all the gold in a fortress and print tokens that are good for getting X amount of gold from the warden of the fortress? Thus the bank was born: a concept of sheer fucking trust that this strip of paper is actually worth something and that nobody cracked the fortress open and stole all that shit while you weren't looking.

Add a few hundred years of shit getting more and more complex behind the scenes and you get the insane fucking stock markets of today that basically trade meta-concepts of financial promises that would be a case study or worth a bachelor thesis for a philosophy major on what they actually represent.

And now, with globalized production and stuff that is made of pure data with no real physical component necessary (music, movies, books, art, and this of course also eventually includes the BLUEPRINTS FOR THE PRODUCTION OF COMPLICATED MACHINERY etc.), we're reaching the point where physical goods are ONLY worth as much as their materials and the work to make it actually costs, since all production facilities in the world are in a race to the bottom of the money necessary to make it.

So since the freedom of information makes all items to be produced worth only the materials and the raw work needed to produce them, why would you pay a developer?

Because I want the fucking item developed. That's why, and only why. And when enough other people do, it shall exist. When they don't it shan't. And when he stops developing, he stops earning. This is our new future.
>>
>>
>>59999789
Makes a lot more sense when you put it that way. That sounds about right, actually. The global economy is practically the definition of a mixed blessing, but I'll agree with you that the stock market and the concepts behind it aare a fucking maze, and add in that they're unnecessary these days. Everybody with a buck in their pocket is a venture capitalist.
>>
>>59999818
>be you
>post blatant GET bait in bait thread
>"I hope nobody sees I'm a huge faggot"
>>
>>59999692
What about NK?
>>
>>59999511
It's a fair point, but I still don't think that it is a reason why we should do away with anti-piracy and anti-intellectual property laws, feel me? I'm ready for what comes next, absolutely. However, I believe the two can coexist peacefully as one doesn't hinder the other.
>>
>>59998420
Jesus literally """pirated""" fish and bread in the Bible, I'm just following his example.

There is nothing just about creating artificial scarcity so you can earn money by doing nothing but restricting access to an unlimited resource through absurdly intrusive means, ESPECIALLY since most software distributer never open their source code to the public even after they cease to profit off of it, rather letting it stagnate and die than providing a means of further support and development via community contribution.

Most software distributors are just flat-out immoral and greedy and I gladly contribute to their (((lost profit))).
>>
>>60000523
>using religion as an argument only when it is convenient
>>
>>60000545
I use religion as an argument all the time, I'm Christian.

If Jesus were walking the Earth today he wouldn't care about your pirated video games, in fact he'd probably encourage you to adequately seed your torrents.
>>
>>59999999
>>60000000
>>
>>59998850
>all creative studios are monopolies
ok
>>
>>59998476
So lending any object is an act of piracy? it isn't profitable to the dude that made the object, and I'm lending it because I don't need it right now so it's like I still have my object but just not using it.
>>
>>60001180
What happened to 60M?
>>
Because capitalism.
>>
Its only illegal if they can prove that you caused them financial harm in a civil suit.




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.