Copying music or film is not really a big crime that we should focus on, there are lots more serious crimes that cause death or extreme life-changes. 'Stealing' is a wrong word to describe piracy, copying music wouldn't really do any harm to the producer or singer, there are lots of people already buying the music or film and whoever made it has earned lots of money for it already.
It is like crime you cant stop crime it will always be happening there is no possible way to stop it so they should just legalize it. It is already legal in the UK why dont we follow. The government is going to have to wake up soon to relize that it is virtually impossible to end it.
There are people in this world who are so poor they can hardly support themselves. I'm not saying that all pirates fit into this category, but many of them do. I used to be for the other side of the argument, but after seeing my friend pirate games, my whole view point changed. He, like many other pirates, do not find enjoyment in most things and can barely support themselves. Who are we to tell people like him that it's not okay to do the one thing they still enjoy, which is playing video games? I mean, he cannot possibly afford the outrageously expensive games currently on the market.
Yes, I believe piracy should be legal. People have been sharing movies, music and other sorts of media for year and years, even before the Internet. The advent of the Internet just made it easier to share these things. Hollywood actors and musicians are overpaid anyway. Piracy will not hurt their salaries. Allow people the freedom to share.
Piracy should be legal because the maintenance of private distribution is arbitrarily regulated and is based on an unfounded assumption that piracy hurts those involved in the production of the goods or services. After all, who hasn't had friends over to watch a movie or decided to take a picture of non-sensitive artwork at the museum? Those who claim that piracy is stealing seem to overlook this point that it is they and their friends who get to benefit off the public display of so called "pirated" goods. Furthermore, it is not the case that pirating causes, say, the actors of a pirated film to suffer financially. If the said film is getting pirated, then isn't that a mark of demand? Didn't Radiohead, by allowing one of their albums to go at a "you decide" price, thereby encourage piracy but didn't find their sales or popularity sink as a result? "Piracy" is just another form of non-monetized demand which has its own benefits of increasing product visibility.
Piracy is not theft. Theft involves taking the original thing, if i invented a device that cloned bread with no repercussions, would a company like Hovis (other bread brands are available) be OK to call it theft then if i had cloned a loaf that was made by them? I think not.
Im a African man from samalia and I sell wife for internet conection to type this comment. I type this with 456 pinng ,
I belive that we should pairat stuff because to feed my African children and their white slaves .
Also free films and music cuz I need money for water
There is not logic as to why we can't go out and just download a file or a program because someone doesn't want us to, computers just don't and shouldn't be forced to work like that. If a company or other personal wants to make money off of a digitized product don't force someone to pay for and then get upset when they don't. If someone really wanted your product they could spend their time remaking it, buying it is only saving them a week or two of their life. This debate only leads to why should people not be able to use their computers for what they want? Because someone says they can't? That's not how this works and it's not right to have some paid to think otherwise.
Rather than being provided media at a price the distributor sees fit, in a way the distributor sees fit, it should be an agreement between consumer and producer - perhaps even down to an individual level. Piracy is a step towards achieving this.
Say I think movie X is worth $5, movie Y $1 and movie Z $20, I should be able to pay in line with that. The overall number of payments, form each individual, will therefore determine what each movie is actually worth - not what a studio thinks its worth.
Piracy is an important step towards economic balance.
Piracy should be legal because more people can benefit from it. In the entire world, more people pirate software in poorer countries. This occurs because they cannot afford to pay the full price for legitimate software and licenses. Although this may slightly dent some huge software companies, it allows even third world countries to have equal access to better technology and software, evening the balance in the world of modern technology and expensive software.
Stealing music from a musician is no better than walking into Macy's and shoplifting a sweater. It's stealing the property of an individual who worked hard to make it and design it. The government needs to make search engines accountable for linking to illegal file sharing websites like Morpheus, Groxter, Limewire, and Kazaa immediately.
What about people who can't afford music or to see the new movies. Plus who cares it is not like they are doing any harm to anyone its not like they murdered someone. All they are doing is posting movies on the internet so people who can't afford it can see it and relax and don't have to worry how they are are going to pay the rest of there bills because they spent some of the money at the movies.
Tell me this, do you pay for a painting, or a photograph from the artist, Why is it any different when it comes to music? It's still an art, it's something somebody has created and spent a lot of hours working on. So when you make a copy of an album, that's equivalent to making a copy of somebody's photograph or painting. It's one less sale for that artist. And one doesn't seem like a lot, but imagine 20,000 people making a copy for their friends, or posting it online, that leaves countless amount of copies being made, which is countless amounts of sales not being made. The artist is then out of money. Which is why they need to charge so much, because they must charge the people who actually buy music more so that they can make a profit and a living. Although the definition says its copying, it is stealing, you are stealing an artists hard work and effort. You're stealing their money and their creation. So, no, piracy should NOT be legal.
Since piracy involves users getting media such as music, movies, and video games for free, the developers and the makers of the media do not receive compensation for their creation. Pirates get the products for no cost while others get the same product by paying for them which may influence others to piracy which hurts the developers more.
This topic is like saying should walking into a shop and stealing something be legal no piracy is just a way so people can get past the costs and help the developers/producers of the software pay for the cost to making the actual thing in the game of the game game Dev tycoon a piracy version of the game was realised by the developers just to show what the domino effect can be on a business showing your business on the pirate copy of the game slowly playing the game like normal then getting hit by piracy causing you to fail So what if you have to pay money to watch a movie the producers had to pay to make it and for the case "I just wanted to watch it once" that's what cinemas or rental is for
For centuries hard work and effort to produce a product have been rewarded,Have you ever been to school?,when you do good, or put effort time and money into something you would like some kind of reward,am i right?.Whats the point of spending millions of dollars and years of work onto a game like COD Black Ops 2 which hundreds of thousands of people enjoy and pay good money for just to have it stolen,e g PIRATED,whats the point of effort and money if theres no reward?
Anyone who says that the celebreties don't care about the money they don't get so it's okay to pirate their music. That way of thinking is stupid: that's like saying it's alright to steal from the rich just because they are rich. They worked to give it to you.
Some people think that piracy isn't considered stealing because it's not «snatching» the thing away. Music or games are not phisical goods but they are considered as a service you buy to use, just like receiving a massage or paying the delivery guy. You can't bring the massage home neither is a delivery a good but you still pay for it so why wouldn't you pay for music, games or programs?
When you don't buy your music, there are certainly some money losses in shops like HMV or the videoclub because they have less customers. When you have less customers, you go bankrupt. This means there are people who looses their jobs. That's money the government won't get in taxes this year. That's money they can't use to build roads or public buildings! They'll need to spend it on the bs for the people who lost their jobs.
Even if we allow piracy to be legal, there's still another law in wich you need to think: the copyright infringement. That's right, it's illegal to steal the music but it's also illegal to appropriate yourself from their stuff!
Anyway, there's so much bad things about free downloading I think we all know that, we just don't like going against it because we are dependent of it. Get over your addiction! Pay what you use.
If we put aside the legal definitions of "theft" and "copyright infringement" for a moment, piracy is fundamentally the acquisition of non-physical goods without going through the intended payment route. Getting something for free when the people who made it wanted money.
Of course, this has been a thing for a long time - videotaping films from broadcast television, borrowing books or CDs, listening to pirate radio stations. But the internet has made piracy possible on an unprecedented scale, to the point where it will definitely affect revenue streams. Because here's the thing...
Making films and TV shows and software costs money. It costs a lot of money, and the reason people do it is because they expect to get that money back by selling the stuff they made. If they don't get that money back, they'll stop making the things you like.
There are a lot of commonly used arguments in favor of piracy, but they all seem to be set against a backdrop of one major social trend: the culture of entitlement. I look at some of the arguments in the yes column, and they all seem to be rooted in the concept that people should be able to have access to whatever they want:
"Corporations make enough money"
"Some people can't afford to pay for things they enjoy"
"I should be able to get what I want for free"
Corporations make money because some people are paying for things. Using that as an excuse not to pay is completely selfish, because you are relying upon other people to act correctly in order to make life easier for yourself. If nobody paid for films, then studios would just stop making them.
If you can't afford something that you want, that someone else has spent time and money making, then you shouldn't get it. You aren't necessarily entitled to have access to everything that you want.
Another type of argument that people use is to claim that it's the outdated business models that drive them to piracy:
"I only pirate things to check them out, and if I like them then I pay for them"
"This wasn't available where I live, so I could only pirate it"
"This was only available with a subscription, and I wanted to buy it a la carte, so I pirated it"
While I have sympathy with this argument, it doesn't hold water. If you don't agree with the way a company chooses to sell their product, then just don't get the product. If enough people feel the same way, the company will change their model. Forcing them to do so by taking the content for free is not morally defensible.
The basic principle behind the economics of producing is that, by producing a given good, you will be reimbursed by your patrons in the form of money or some other good which you find worthwhile in trading. While many goods could be considered "post-scaricty goods" this does not remove the fact that, while the recreation of the goods is simple to do, the good itself was created in the first place by an individual who did so to make a profit. Goods are not made to entertain, they are bought to entertain and, through copying a good and selling it or giving it away when you were not the one who created it, you are robbing the original maker of that good the right to sell what they themselves created. There is no right to free goods. This applies to both physical and digital goods and cannot be taken away from the producer.
Alright i'm use piracy as well i admit. All of you people who said yes have to use your heads. If piracy was legal and everyone did it. Then the people who created the games, musics, books would lose money, and they wont make any more. It will be kill tons of media and entertainment. Just keep what your doing.