Why DON'T you pirate?

Piratecat · Apr 9, 2009

Don't argue and try to sneak in insults, folks. It's a sensitive subject; even when you don't agree with someone, giving them the benefit of the doubt is the best way to handle it.

EDIT: Ninja'ed by Plane Sailing!

RangerWickett · Apr 9, 2009

An interesting philosophical perspective one of my friends uses to justify his piracy is this:

Consider the economy as a whole. Say that there are good and bad parts of the economy. Good parts are things that help society -- creating infrastructure, feeding, clothing, and making people happy. Bad parts are things that harm society -- drugs that lead to addiction, violence that hurts people, theft that takes things away from people so they can no longer use them.

Spending money on bad things creates profits for the bad part of the economy, and we don't want that. Spending money on good things creates profits for the good part of the economy, and we do want that.

In this philosophical model, it doesn't matter where you spend your money, as long as it is part of the good part of the economy. You have $X and you can spend them however you want, as long as you don't give them to the bad part of the economy. Buying drugs or stolen goods encourages more drug use and more theft of people's possessions. However (again, in the perspective of this model), downloading pirated movies, games, or music for free does not give any money to bad people, and ultimately you'll still spend the same amount of money somewhere in the good part of the economy.

Sure, you're harming the company that is creating these products, but that is balanced out in that you are helping other companies instead. You pirate a new CD, and use the money that could have paid for the CD to instead pay for a shrimp dinner. Sony loses $15, and Red Lobster gets it instead.

Ultimately, in this philosophy, you're smart to spend money on things you like instead of getting them for free (because without funding, they'll stop making those nice things), but as long as you're not giving money to people who hurt others, you're not doing anything wrong.

comrade raoul · Apr 9, 2009

RangerWickett said:
An interesting philosophical perspective one of my friends uses to justify his piracy is this...

That's definitely an interesting perspective!

I think the central philosophical question here is whether using someone's property, per se, imposes substantial obligations to them, above and beyond whatever obligations are imposed by the consequences of your use. (For example, which is the more important reason for me not to use your car without your permission--that it deprives you of something you need to be able to use when you want to, or that it's your car?) There are all kinds of ways to develop either answer, and both sorts of answer are respectable. But it seems to me that most people tend to have pretty strong intuitive allegiances to one approach or the other, and people who focus on the consequences are probably going to have a considerably easier time finding ways to be okay with software piracy than people who focus on the act.

Aberzanzorax · Apr 9, 2009

Loose ethics.

There are at least three types of Nomothetic ethics: Virtue theory, Deontological, and Consequentialism. Each is considered a valid theory. There are also "absolute" and "relative" theories of morality. These are ways to define and ultimately try to "pin down" the framework of morality. Within each of these systems and theories two people subscribing to the same exact theory could believe the same action is ethical or not for different reasons.

My point? For some people, any pirating is immoral. To others, there are self imposed rules that make certain pirating moral and other ways of pirating not. (This is not just justification, it is derived from deeply held beliefs. Saying that it is mere rationalization is to misunderstand another's system of morality.) To still others, any pirating is moral.

It is NOT clearcut to define any act as moral or immoral when there is room for debate. There is almost always room for debate. I'd disagree with anyone who says it is "clearly the moral choice" about most things in life. What they are really saying is "it is clearly the moral choice within my own understanding of my system of ethics and morals".

Additionally, Milgram's experiments (among many others...Zimbardo's prison experiment, anyone?) have shown that people often, in even slightly different situations (even when they know they are short lived and artificial), can quickly act contrary to their own moral code.

So, my point with the above is not to extend this conversation of whether pirating is moral or not. It is to hopefully quash it. For some it may be, for others not. However, ethics is still a viable reason not to do something, if your ethics dictate that is the appropriate resonse.

Some people believe pirating is unethical. That is one reason (but perhaps not the only one) why they don't pirate.

Some people don't believe pirating is unethical. There may be other reasons they don't pirate.

The only person "rationalizing" is the person who believes it is unethical, but does it anyway.

So. Beyond ethics, what other reasons prevent one from pirating?

Morrus · Apr 10, 2009

RangerWickett said:
Sure, you're harming the company that is creating these products, but that is balanced out in that you are helping other companies instead. You pirate a new CD, and use the money that could have paid for the CD to instead pay for a shrimp dinner. Sony loses $15, and Red Lobster gets it instead.

So by that rationale, it's OK for Red Lobster to steal $15 from Sony? Because that's the net effect. I can take your friend's car, sell it and but $10,000 of food from Red Lobster for myself, and that's OK with him?

Klaus · Apr 10, 2009

RangerWickett said:
An interesting philosophical perspective one of my friends uses to justify his piracy is this:

Consider the economy as a whole. Say that there are good and bad parts of the economy. Good parts are things that help society -- creating infrastructure, feeding, clothing, and making people happy. Bad parts are things that harm society -- drugs that lead to addiction, violence that hurts people, theft that takes things away from people so they can no longer use them.

Spending money on bad things creates profits for the bad part of the economy, and we don't want that. Spending money on good things creates profits for the good part of the economy, and we do want that.

In this philosophical model, it doesn't matter where you spend your money, as long as it is part of the good part of the economy. You have and you can spend them however you want, as long as you don't give them to the bad part of the economy. Buying drugs or stolen goods encourages more drug use and more theft of people's possessions. However (again, in the perspective of this model), downloading pirated movies, games, or music for free does not give any money to bad people, and ultimately you'll still spend the same amount of money somewhere in the good part of the economy.

Sure, you're harming the company that is creating these products, but that is balanced out in that you are helping other companies instead. You pirate a new CD, and use the money that could have paid for the CD to instead pay for a shrimp dinner. Sony loses $15, and Red Lobster gets it instead.

Ultimately, in this philosophy, you're smart to spend money on things you like instead of getting them for free (because without funding, they'll stop making those nice things), but as long as you're not giving money to people who hurt others, you're not doing anything wrong.

That philosophy doesn't hold water, because "Teh Economy" isn't a single monolithic entity. You pay for what you acquire, and THAT money goes to feed the economic wheel through the proper channels (paying electric bills, distribution companies, going to the original creator, who in turn can afford a shrimp dinner*).

DrunkonDuty · Apr 10, 2009

I don't pirate 'cause me crew mutinied and marooned me on this desert island. I reckon there was some damn dirty ninja's involved.

ProfessorPain · Apr 10, 2009

For me its Ethics and Fear.

ProfessorPain · Apr 10, 2009

Morrus said:
So by that rationale, it's OK for Red Lobster to steal $15 from Sony? Because that's the net effect. I can take your friend's car, sell it and but $10,000 of food from Red Lobster for myself, and that's OK with him?

I always find those kinds of arguments fascinating because no matter how many terrible things the doer does, as long as they achieve some greater good in the end, its somehow okay. By this logic, it would not only be okay for Red Lobster to steal 15 dollars from sony. It would be okay for Red Lobster to drug your order, wait for you to pass out and remove your kidney in order to supply it to a person in need. Or for sony to kidnap you, get your family to pay a hefty ransom, then invest that money in a charity album for leprosy.

fireinthedust · Apr 10, 2009

My reasons:

*) creativity: I like to use what I've bought, and having new options means I get lazy and don't *read* the stuff I have. Keep in mind I own a lot of books, so it's a discipline to use the stuff to its fullest rather than just buy more. Like, avoid the "addiction" aspect and get into the "appreciation" aspect.

*) company(s) support: I want the hobby to keep on going, and if even a "giant" like WOTC loses enough in this economy, there goes D&D.
I use 4e, and think the idea of quality books coming out slowly is smart. If they have loads of miniatures, battle maps, and art that's good. Dragon articles to keep me going between "hits". all of that, sure. However, don't overdo it and the public will easily manage to collect the whole set.
Same thing for Paizo when I get their stuff. And my local store (Hairy T/eBay for the win!)

Mind you, ideally I can wait until celebrations like holiday season and my birthday to stock up on books (or boxing day, or Gencon if I can afford to go).

Also, if I'm going to shell out cash I want it to be for really good quality stuff. I like artbooks, for example.

I also like the option to sample. Pirating is very tempting, so regardless of the .pdf debacle (which isn't for me, but I think the WOTC public relations managment or at least the marketing department is unprofessionally naive about how to represent the company to their fans; R&D is amazing, product is great, but man-o-man the pr fiascos...)

For the guilt reason I go to local stores.