undefined | Better HN

0 pointsAmezarak11y ago0 comments

> I on the other hand have no legal way to pay for some of the TV shows I'm watching. Even if I wanted. And I want.

Devil's advocate: so? Why should anyone have to provide you with the entertainment that you want? Why shouldn't they be able to exercise their right to sell their product to whoever they want - and leave out whoever they don't want? What possible justification could there be for that level of entitlement? What moral justification could there be for saying: sell me your product, or I will take it? How far does this go with IP? If a web designer refuses to sell me their design, am I free to take it? At least with tools like Photoshop, you can claim you "need" it to do work and make a living. Nobody needs a TV show.

I pirate TV. Some of the shows I could (and do; I also have Netflix) get legally and some I couldn't, but the fact of the matter is nobody "owes" me their TV show and I could just not watch it. And I would just stop watching, if the cost of all the TV shows I wanted to watch ever exceeded $10/month and piracy was too difficult/risky. I'm not kidding myself, the reason I pirate is because it's both cheap and convenient.

Honestly I'd probably be better off not watching TV anyway. :)

0 comments

2 comments · 2 top-level

nothrabannosir11y ago

That argument works only in defense, not in offense. Look:

A: Pirating is wrong!

B: But I have no alternatives

A: So what?

You are right, of course: so what? But if "so what?" is an option, then the entire discussion becomes:

A: Pirating is wrong!

B: So what?

B doesn't care about this discussion in the first place. A wants to make a point. That means you can't use "so what?".

This is what lultimouomo meant when he said "the excuse is weak, but the fault itself is also considered weak." [para]

Again, not saying I disagree. Of course; so what? But, in that case: people pirate. So what? You're the one making a point. If your point is just "it's illegal": everyone knows that already. So what?

mikeash11y ago

If a web designer refuses to sell you their design, would it be wrong to take it anyway, if all you're going to do is look at it in private? I would have a tough time condemning that.

You're right that nobody owes us their TV show. But on the other hand, I don't see why we owe them assistance to enforce their wishes.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

2 comments · 2 top-level

nothrabannosir11y ago

That argument works only in defense, not in offense. Look:

A: Pirating is wrong!

B: But I have no alternatives

A: So what?

You are right, of course: so what? But if "so what?" is an option, then the entire discussion becomes:

A: Pirating is wrong!

B: So what?

B doesn't care about this discussion in the first place. A wants to make a point. That means you can't use "so what?".

This is what lultimouomo meant when he said "the excuse is weak, but the fault itself is also considered weak." [para]

Again, not saying I disagree. Of course; so what? But, in that case: people pirate. So what? You're the one making a point. If your point is just "it's illegal": everyone knows that already. So what?

mikeash11y ago

If a web designer refuses to sell you their design, would it be wrong to take it anyway, if all you're going to do is look at it in private? I would have a tough time condemning that.

You're right that nobody owes us their TV show. But on the other hand, I don't see why we owe them assistance to enforce their wishes.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse