Reply With QuoteDo you really not see?Originally Posted by Jim Schnobrich
How does that change anything?Ah, but the other word that should have been emphasized was "Record", as in "HBO Has Only Itself To Blame For Record 'Game Of Thrones' Piracy". Nice try, though!
"Sh - no - brick"
Do you really not see?
It means that even though there would still be piracy of Game of Thrones, the fact that it's the most pirated show is HBO's fault because of their distribution methods.
The assertion throughout this thread is that piracy, regardless of its amount, is a result of a flawed distribution method. So, again, I fail to see what download counts have to do with it.
"Sh - no - brick"
Jim was responding to WTFWNFD's post about the title of the thread. Which is not that HBO has only itself to blame for piracy, but for "record" piracy.
Nope, assertions in this thread have been quite dependent on the amount. Yes, some people will always pirate. However, many people will only pirate if the available business model makes piracy relatively less costly for them (taking ethical, time, and effort costs in account as well as monetary costs). If HBO is failing to reach those people, and it's pretty obvious that they are, then they do have only themselves to blame for the record amounts of piracy (not for piracy in general).
It doesn't matter if it is record amounts or minimal amounts. As I said, it is an incontestable fact that HBO is having their legal rights violated. You yourself have agreed that copyright infringement is illegal and should be. So we are in agreement here.
Yes, as has been said many times, maybe HBO may be making a mistake in slowly adapting. Doesn't matter. Not the victim's fault. Doesn't matter what it was wearing.
To argue that it is only HBO's fault, that they only have themselves to blame, for having their legal rights violated is fucked up.
Again, to totally absolve those who choose to violate the rights of others of all personal responsibility for their illegal actions (that you agree are illegal and should be illegal) is fucked up.
Edit:
And where do you stand on those that continually choose to violate the legal rights of other content creators and providers that do indeed have a business model that does addresses the issues of availablity, format, ease of access, and low price?
Is there some vague continuum of moral/legal justification for violating legal rights?
At what point in your eyes would a company or creator be completely blameless for piracy and having their legal rights violated?
Last edited by Doc Randy; 05-15-2012 at 02:36 PM.
"Don't believe everything you read on the internet. That's how World War I got started." - Abraham Lincoln
"90% of what I write is sarcasm -- the other half is bullshit."
Meh. That post took half an hour to get posted, so Jim beat me to it.
Last edited by Andreas; 05-15-2012 at 02:32 PM.
It matters for the claim being made whether it's record amounts or minimal amounts. As I just posted: "If HBO is failing to reach those people, and it's pretty obvious that they are, then they do have only themselves to blame for the record amounts of piracy (not for piracy in general)."It doesn't matter if it is record amounts or minimal amounts. As I said, it is an incontestable fact that HBO is having their legal rights violated. You yourself have agreed that copyright infringement is illegal and should be. So we are in agreement here.
Yes, as has been said many times, maybe HBO may be making a mistake in slowly adapting. Doesn't matter. Not the victim's fault. Doesn't matter what it was wearing.
To argue that it is only HBO's fault, that they only have themselves to blame, for having their legal rights violated is fucked up.
Again, to totally absolve those who choose to violate the rights of others of all personal responsibility for their illegal actions (that you agree are illegal and should be illegal) is fucked up.
HBO is not to blame for the existence of piracy or the actions of individual pirates, but we live in a modern era in which technology makes piracy incredibly easy. That's not going to change in the short term, and probably not in the long term either. Only HBO has control over their own business model, which (some of us claim) is responsible for the fact that piracy is occurring in record amounts (not the fact that it's occurring at all).
Yes, we are taking as a given that people's behavior in regard to piracy isn't going to change. It would take a massive social effort to increase the "integrity cost" of piracy for the average person, and media companies generally are not viewed as bastions of morality by the general populace.
The implied equivalency between piracy and violent crimes is kind of pathetic, also. Property/economic rights are not nearly as fundamental as personal/civil rights.
Why do you insist on making the conversation about "moral justification"? Why are you so hung up on this?
Yes, piracy is generally an immoral act; but at the end of the day, it's an economic problem, and yelling about the act doesn't help solve the problem. You have to understand how things are before you can start to make them how they should be.
If you want an economic metric for "blame", here's one: if a company could modify its business model to appeal to a broader base of consumers without causing itself a net loss, but does not do so, it shares some blame for piracy of its content.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks