• The morality of pirating
    219 replies, posted
Pirating isn't morally correct. Let me explain why: You download something for free that otherwise costs money, then fully enjoy the product without paying money for it. However, you don't have to be morally correct all the time. Making threads on Facepunch about this subject isn't morally correct. Stop trying to make yourself think you did something right.
[QUOTE=TheLocust;29287090]I've discovered that pirating is justified and is morally correct. Or atleast pirating from big companies. You figure your money would just go to them and little would go to the people actually responsible for your product.... so what's the point in buying? That's about it... do I sound stupid? There's no point in buying virtual products if the people who made it don't get a big enough reparation. So fuck big companies. Am I making sense? [B]Good example of what I'm trying to say; [/B][/QUOTE] Pirating cannot be moral for one reason. Kant, a famous more modern philosopher, suggested that if we were to accept certain moral codes of ethical judgements, there are certian things we have to imagine, things he called the 3 Maxims. These 3 Maxims make up the "Categorical Imperative." 1. The first premise is that a person acts morally if his or her conduct would, without condition, be the "right" conduct for any person in similar circumstances (the "First Maxim"). 2. The second premise is that conduct is "right" if it treats others as ends in themselves and not as means to an end (the "Second Maxim"). 3. The conclusion is that a person acts morally when he or she acts as if his or her conduct was establishing a universal law governing others in similar circumstances (the "Third Maxim"). In reference to number 3. ([B]"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law."[/B]) So in this example, for pirating to be moral, we should be able to visualise a world where everyone pirates, because it would have to be Universal law (Maxim 3). Moreover, we would have to assume that pirating doesn't treat people as a means to our own benefit, i.e. that by pirating we don't exploit someone else for our own gain. And Pirating fulfills neither of these. And that isn't possible, because, without customers money, games, movies and music and such, wouldn't be developed and made, so pirating would be impossible. Furthermore, pirating can't be morally right because we would be exploiting the people that made the product, big or small. You can't say pirating is morally acceptable against big companies but not smaller, because it's logically inconsistent; you exploit the person who made the game, regardless if it was Notch or EA. And if you did only pirate from "big" companies; you'd never[U]get[/U] any big companies. As soon as the big company became big (by whatever measure you chose: wealth, turnover, profits, revenue etc) they would instantly have everything of theirs pirated and would go bankrupt. Thus pirating isn't logically moral.All in all. Read up on Morality and Ethics before you try this agin OP.
[QUOTE=Benf199105;29297070]Pirating cannot be moral for one reason. Kant suggested that if we were to accept certain moral codes of ethical judgements, there are certian things we have to imagine. For example, one of them, was, if we accepted the standpoint, could we imagine a world where everyone did it? So in this example, for pirating to be moral, we should be able to visualise a world where everyone pirates. And that isn't possible, because, without customers money, games, movies and music and such, wouldn't be developed and made, so pirating would be impossible. Thus pirating isn't logically moral.[/QUOTE] Hot damn, we got ourselves a philosopher
[QUOTE=Greenen72;29297092]Hot damn, we got ourselves a philosopher[/QUOTE] Yessir you have. ;) also edited with more philosophy goodness
If you download something for free that is supposed to cost money then you are stealing.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQZSHpNcsRk[/media]
[quote] the ones that pirate a game, try it, like it, and then buy the legit copy, as an appreciation of the work people did on said game. (good for both, company isn't loosing money or potential customers)[/quote] there is absolutely nothing wrong with that
I'm sure the point has been mentioned already, but if a player wouldn't buy the game in the first place, them pirating it isn't going to cost the relevant company any money whatsoever.
[QUOTE=Benf199105;29297070]Pirating cannot be moral for one reason. Kant, a famous more modern philosopher, suggested that if we were to accept certain moral codes of ethical judgements, there are certian things we have to imagine, things he called the 3 Maxims. These 3 Maxims make up the "Categorical Imperative." 1. The first premise is that a person acts morally if his or her conduct would, without condition, be the "right" conduct for any person in similar circumstances (the "First Maxim"). 2. The second premise is that conduct is "right" if it treats others as ends in themselves and not as means to an end (the "Second Maxim"). 3. The conclusion is that a person acts morally when he or she acts as if his or her conduct was establishing a universal law governing others in similar circumstances (the "Third Maxim"). In reference to number 3. ([B]"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law."[/B]) So in this example, for pirating to be moral, we should be able to visualise a world where everyone pirates, because it would have to be Universal law (Maxim 3). Moreover, we would have to assume that pirating doesn't treat people as a means to our own benefit, i.e. that by pirating we don't exploit someone else for our own gain. And Pirating fulfills neither of these. And that isn't possible, because, without customers money, games, movies and music and such, wouldn't be developed and made, so pirating would be impossible. Furthermore, pirating can't be morally right because we would be exploiting the people that made the product, big or small. You can't say pirating is morally acceptable against big companies but not smaller, because it's logically inconsistent; you exploit the person who made the game, regardless if it was Notch or EA. And if you did only pirate from "big" companies; you'd never[U]get[/U] any big companies. As soon as the big company became big (by whatever measure you chose: wealth, turnover, profits, revenue etc) they would instantly have everything of theirs pirated and would go bankrupt. Thus pirating isn't logically moral.All in all. Read up on Morality and Ethics before you try this agin OP.[/QUOTE] There many more ethical philosophers than Kant, and not all of them follow his ethical system. JS
What pisses me off is that more than 80% of people who rated you dumb have pirate content on their PCs.
Do what you want cause a pirate is free. you are a pirate! :pirate:
[QUOTE=Kontradaz;29298517]There many more ethical philosophers than Kant, and not all of them follow his ethical system. JS[/QUOTE] Yes, obviously. Buy deontology is a very useful starting point in these kind of discussions, and one I agree with quite a way. Especially the Universal law maxim.
Piracy saves nature.
[media]http://i.imgur.com/q5l8l.jpg[/media] I'm wholeheartedly in support of pirating and piracy. I run several groups whose sole purpose is to pirate, for I know that, in his heart, the Flying Spaghetti Monster will take us all into his lair of strippers and beer, leaving those heathens who do not partake of his flesh nor donning his holy regalia to be smitten by global warming, as demonstrated above. [editline]19th April 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=nemmises5;29298232]there is absolutely nothing wrong with that[/QUOTE] There's the fact that if people released full games as demos, the vast majority wouldn't pay for it. Just go on some flash game website and check how much people are making from them (Kind of a bad example, because most flash games aren't as good as an actual game, but yeah)
People get banned by mods for warez even though im 90% sure that they do it themselves too :v:
[QUOTE=Garik;29300221]People get banned by mods for warez even though im 90% sure that they do it themselves too :v:[/QUOTE] Yeah, you probably don't know anything about the GMF then
[QUOTE=Lord Hayden II;29287534]For one, your stupid; not only is pirating illegal in most countries, but it is also stealing. Stealing is stealing, regardless from who it is. Stealing from a big company is pretty much the equivilant of stealing from a small company. It's still stealing. You cannot say pirating is good, in ANY way.[/QUOTE] oh shut the fuck up we aren't all posh twats like you. Plus pirating something from the internet does not cause as much harm than what stealing something in real life would. So don't even fucking compare the two.
[QUOTE=Greenen72;29300243]Yeah, you probably don't know anything about the GMF then[/QUOTE] Whats GMF? Tryed googling it, didn't work.
There is zero moral backing to pirating something, and someone who tries to justify it is trying to keep their conscious clear. Also, don't say "They wouldn't have bought it anyway unless it was cheaper." Have you ever heard of the Humble Indie Bundle?
Many people pirate games that they would never buy in the first place end up liking and buying them, that's one of the few good things I can think of.
steal    [steel] ,verb, stole, sto·len, steal·ing, noun –verb (used with object) 1. to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, especially secretly or by force: A pickpocket stole his watch. 2. to appropriate (ideas, credit, words, etc.) without right or acknowledgment. 3. to take, get, or win insidiously, surreptitiously, subtly, or by chance: He stole my girlfriend. 4. to move, bring, convey, or put secretly or quietly; smuggle (usually followed by away, from, in, into, etc.): They stole the bicycle into the bedroom to surprise the child. 5. Baseball . (of a base runner) to gain (a base) without the help of a walk or batted ball, as by running to it during the delivery of a pitch. 6. Games . to gain (a point, advantage, etc.) by strategy, chance, or luck. 7. to gain or seize more than one's share of attention in, as by giving a superior performance: The comedian stole the show. –verb (used without object) 8. to commit or practice theft. 9. to move, go, or come secretly, quietly, or unobserved: She stole out of the house at midnight. 10. to pass, happen, etc., imperceptibly, gently, or gradually: The years steal by. 11. Baseball . (of a base runner) to advance a base without the help of a walk or batted ball. –noun 12. Informal . an act of stealing; theft. 13. Informal . the thing stolen; booty. 14. Informal . something acquired at a cost far below its real value; bargain: This dress is a steal at $40. 15. Baseball . the act of advancing a base by stealing. —Idiom 16. steal someone's thunder, to appropriate or use another's idea, plan, words, etc. [quote]2. to appropriate (ideas, credit, words, etc.) without right or acknowledgment.[/quote]
I think trying to justify piracy is kinda stupid. Do you think shoplifters think what they are doing is right and wants it to be legal to do it? No, they don't because they know what right and wrong is but they decided to do wrong.
[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;29300612]I think trying to justify piracy is kinda stupid. Do you think shoplifters think what they are doing is right and wants it to be legal to do it? No, they don't because they know what right and wrong is but they decided to do wrong.[/QUOTE] He needed to support his family! Think of the children!
[QUOTE=Monkey_;29300338]Whats GMF? Tryed googling it, didn't work.[/QUOTE] Gold Members' Crack Lounge
While I'm totally for any sort of Robin Hood antics, in reality that's not how it works. It's the workers who lose out, when a company loses profit, long before the people at the top. The reason I think piracy should be treated differently to theft, however, is that digital information is post-scarcity. I see post-scarcity as the ingredient we need to basically fix the world. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the workers/artists getting what they deserve. Nobody would deny that. But as long as corporations are pressing harder and harder to control something that won't run out, I think they're damaging society. Services like spotify* tried to embrace post-scarcity in a way that worked for everyone. *spotify seem to have turned their back on us somewhat and have now made their free services a lot, lot shittier I think the act of piracy is directly harmful -the employee ultimately loses out which isn't fair. But I think it's indirectly beneficial, because it's pressuring the people in charge to realise that they need to adapt to post-scarcity or (hopefully) crash and burn.
[QUOTE=Benf199105;29297070]Pirating cannot be moral for one reason. Kant, a famous more modern philosopher, suggested that if we were to accept certain moral codes of ethical judgements, there are certian things we have to imagine, things he called the 3 Maxims. These 3 Maxims make up the "Categorical Imperative." 1. The first premise is that a person acts morally if his or her conduct would, without condition, be the "right" conduct for any person in similar circumstances (the "First Maxim"). 2. The second premise is that conduct is "right" if it treats others as ends in themselves and not as means to an end (the "Second Maxim"). 3. The conclusion is that a person acts morally when he or she acts as if his or her conduct was establishing a universal law governing others in similar circumstances (the "Third Maxim"). In reference to number 3. ([B]"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law."[/B]) So in this example, for pirating to be moral, we should be able to visualise a world where everyone pirates, because it would have to be Universal law (Maxim 3). Moreover, we would have to assume that pirating doesn't treat people as a means to our own benefit, i.e. that by pirating we don't exploit someone else for our own gain. And Pirating fulfills neither of these. And that isn't possible, because, without customers money, games, movies and music and such, wouldn't be developed and made, so pirating would be impossible. Furthermore, pirating can't be morally right because we would be exploiting the people that made the product, big or small. You can't say pirating is morally acceptable against big companies but not smaller, because it's logically inconsistent; you exploit the person who made the game, regardless if it was Notch or EA. And if you did only pirate from "big" companies; you'd never[U]get[/U] any big companies. As soon as the big company became big (by whatever measure you chose: wealth, turnover, profits, revenue etc) they would instantly have everything of theirs pirated and would go bankrupt. Thus pirating isn't logically moral.All in all. Read up on Morality and Ethics before you try this agin OP.[/QUOTE] [img]http://www.stanceiseverything.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/mother-of-god-super-troopers.jpg[/img] [editline]19th April 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Dark RaveN;29298638]What pisses me off is that more than 80% of people who rated you dumb have pirate content on their PCs.[/QUOTE] Regardless of whether they do or don't, they are not trying to justify it.
[QUOTE=Benf199105;29297070]Pirating cannot be moral for one reason. Kant, a famous more modern philosopher, suggested that if we were to accept certain moral codes of ethical judgements, there are certian things we have to imagine, things he called the 3 Maxims. These 3 Maxims make up the "Categorical Imperative." 1. The first premise is that a person acts morally if his or her conduct would, without condition, be the "right" conduct for any person in similar circumstances (the "First Maxim"). 2. The second premise is that conduct is "right" if it treats others as ends in themselves and not as means to an end (the "Second Maxim"). 3. The conclusion is that a person acts morally when he or she acts as if his or her conduct was establishing a universal law governing others in similar circumstances (the "Third Maxim"). In reference to number 3. ([B]"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law."[/B]) So in this example, for pirating to be moral, we should be able to visualise a world where everyone pirates, because it would have to be Universal law (Maxim 3). Moreover, we would have to assume that pirating doesn't treat people as a means to our own benefit, i.e. that by pirating we don't exploit someone else for our own gain. And Pirating fulfills neither of these. And that isn't possible, because, without customers money, games, movies and music and such, wouldn't be developed and made, so pirating would be impossible. Furthermore, pirating can't be morally right because we would be exploiting the people that made the product, big or small. You can't say pirating is morally acceptable against big companies but not smaller, because it's logically inconsistent; you exploit the person who made the game, regardless if it was Notch or EA. And if you did only pirate from "big" companies; you'd never[U]get[/U] any big companies. As soon as the big company became big (by whatever measure you chose: wealth, turnover, profits, revenue etc) they would instantly have everything of theirs pirated and would go bankrupt. Thus pirating isn't logically moral.All in all. Read up on Morality and Ethics before you try this agin OP.[/QUOTE] I'd recommend not citing Kant, if you want to win a moral argument. Kantian ethics is basically slated by a huge majority of political theorists/moral philosophers. [i]A priori[/i] morality is fallacious because it presupposes morality is objective. Not that I'm denying it isn't objective... what I mean to say is that there is no way of falsifying the claim, so it is meaningless. And as a last resort, if you still decide to be committed to Kant, you must accept that: (In accordance to the third maxim) Everyone would will truth-telling to become a universal law, hence telling an axe-murderer where his quarry is, is a moral obligation (if he asked), despite the fact you know he's going to brutally murder them. Deotological ethics is so full of presuppositions I don't see how anyone can realistically pursue it.
[QUOTE=TheLocust;29288186]Yeah, but usually what refers to "STEALING" is lost revenue[/QUOTE] That's assuming that the pirate would've bought the product if there was no way of pirating it, which is hardly true.
[QUOTE=Robbobin;29307172](In accordance to the third maxim) Everyone would will truth-telling to become a universal law, hence telling an axe-murderer where his quarry is, is a moral obligation (if he asked), despite the fact you know he's going to brutally murder them.[/QUOTE] Not necessarily. Would you necessarily want someone to tell you that you are fat looking even if it's true? Sometimes people love to be lied to.
In some sense of the word piracy is undeniably stealing. Rather than denying this fact, people for piracy should instead prove that stealing isn't always wrong. [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=lulzbocksV2;29307244]Not necessarily. Would you necessarily want someone to tell you that you are fat looking even if it's true? Sometimes people love to be lied to.[/QUOTE] Fair point. So if the morality of [b]lying[/b] is context dependent, why not piracy? [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] If I truthfully wanted to know if I was fat, I would want the truth, tbh.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.