• myslsl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      In my example privacy invasion definitely occurs. If you disagree with that, then you should review what I initially said.

      If the notion that when people don’t want to share things with you, you have an unqualified right to take those things, and that doing that is just inherently not damaging, then I think your position is unrealistic and incredibly self serving.

      Do you have some point to make here besides claiming you’re just never doing anything wrong when it serves your interests?

        • myslsl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Your point is wrong. My point is that you can’t always (ethically) just copy other peoples stuff, just like you can’t always just take things from people. My point is not that piracy is never justified. My point is not that you are personally doing something wrong by pirating things. My point is not that you can’t be justified in copying other peoples stuff sometimes without permission. My point is not that piracy or copying other peoples data and documents always causes harm.

          Edit: When was pirating “publically available” software specifically ever central to my point?

            • myslsl@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The only response you’ve given is “that’s not harmful”, which is in no way an argument for why it isn’t. It’s not totally inconceivable that taking things, even data, without permission can be harmful and to claim otherwise seems willfully stupid and in this case self serving.

    • myslsl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Here’s another example. Say a person makes pornographic photos and videos for their significant other, suppose that content gets leaked onto the internet and is uploaded to popular torrent sites without their permission. How is piracy of this sort of content not an invasion of privacy? How is piracy of this sort of content not unethical?

        • myslsl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          wut??? nobody in their right mind downloads that stuff! that is NOT what we are talking about, we are talking about movies and games and music

          I felt like it was pretty clear that I was not talking about things as small as pirating a couple movies and games from multimillion dollar companies?

          you really made this up out of nowhere. nobody defends distribuiting private pictures of people… and BTW in that case is not piracy by definition…

          Is it not piracy? Please clarify the difference to me?

            • myslsl@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              making a copy of Frozen is not.

              I feel like I’ve been pretty clesr that this sort of example is not what I’m talking about…

                • myslsl@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I don’t see why I need your permission? I feel like talking about when it is and isn’t ethical to reproduce data is appropriate in this sort of community.

            • myslsl@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              piracy is distributing copies of publicly available media.

              Arguably software, films and music aren’t “publically available” in the sense that they’re only conditionally available to the public (ignoring piracy).

              But okay, lets take the pornographic example. Say they occasionally sell nude photos to acquaintances too. Now the photos are in some sense “publicly available” in the sense that some people can buy them. Is it now suddenly okay to pirate this media? If so, then why?

              accessing a private device and making copies of personal content inside is illegal and unethical.

              Did you not read my very first example where I claimed almost exactly that. What have you been thinking I was talking about?

                • myslsl@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Feel free to clarify why? At what point does my example become what we’re talking about? Is it the number of people the content is sold for? Is it the amount of money the content is sold for? Enlighten me.