The ability to change features, prices, and availability of things you’ve already paid for is a powerful temptation to corporations.

  • Copernican@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    If this rhetoric was used in a conservative opinion piece instead of a pro piracy opinion piece, I’m pretty sure it would be banned for calling for violence towards specific individuals.

    Guillotine preview image and quotes like:

    Sure, Zaslav deserves to be staked out over an anthill and slathered in high-fructose corn syrup. But save the next anthill for the Sony exec who shipped a product that would let Zaslav come into your home and rob you. That piece of shit knew what they were doing and they did it anyway. Fuck them. Sideways. With a brick.

    Sure, Warner is an unbelievably shitty company run by the single most guillotineable executive in all of Southern California, the loathsome David Zaslav, who oversaw the merger of Warner with Discovery.

    What a trash article and site. How is this permitted.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’m pretty sure it would be banned for calling for violence towards specific individuals.

      People with no attachment to reality might overreact like that, but the rest of us have reading comprehension on our side.

      deserves to be staked out over an anthill

      “deserves to be”: this is a phrase commonly used when people are basically venting, but it almost never suggests that someone should actually do the action. Just search for the phrase “deserves to be string up” and you’ll see just how common it is.

      As for “over an anthill”, when someone describes an outrageous situation, that’s yet another clue that they’re venting, not proposing an actual action.

      Honest people who read the news and opinion pieces should know this, so either you’re new to reading, or you’re dishonest.

      Warner is an unbelievably shitty company run by the single most guillotineable executive

      Again, first day reading? Or just dishonest?

      • Copernican@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        No, I’ve just been living in American for the past 30 years or so and have an understanding of what inflammatory and dehumanizing attacks on individuals and groups does to society. And even if it’s permissible based on the rules of this community, it’s still garbage journalism.

    • corship@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I mean, the analogy doesn’t even work.

      Just because I can only rent a car and not buy it, doesn’t mean it would be fine to smash the window and steal it instead.

      • Tier 1 Build-A-Bear 🧸@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        11 months ago

        What if the company wasn’t trying to get you to rent the car? What if they tried REALLY hard to get you to think you were buying the car, but once you “bought” it, they start crippling things and telling you you can’t fix it yourself but instead need to pay exorbitant prices for them to “upgrade” it, since, now that you’ve “bought” it, you don’t technically “own” it

        • Copernican@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          But, is the piracy only justifiable if and only if the item you bought was unilaterally taken away from you? This seems to be arguing that: SOMETIMES purchased digital goods are stolen from a consumer, therefore it is ALWAYS justifiable for a consumer to pirate. I think we need a more nuanced take on piracy.

          And now that SAG AFTRA concessions were made to give to more payout to actors and other creative folks based on streaming metrics, I think that means consumers should attempt to stream if available to help ensure the creators hit their metrics for payout.

          • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            My criteria for what makes something worth purchasing versus pirating is pretty simple: can I purchase a file in a format that I want to be able to use on all my devices without DRM for a fair price. If that’s the case then I’ll buy it. I buy stuff off GOG and Humble Bundle all the time.

            As for streaming. If the service is good and has enough content on it to keep me invested then I’ll pay for the sub. For several years Netflix was good enough that I almost completely stopped pirating movies and shows. There was just always something on there to watch. When it got to the point that I had to look for shit that I hadn’t seen before and wanted to watch I cancelled it, and I haven’t picked up any other services since then other than what came with my internet. I’m not going to juggle 14 steaming services and try to keep track of what is available on which one when I can just pay for a VPN and download everything from one source. Especially considering some of the more niche stuff I want to watch isn’t available on any of them a lot of the time.

            The bottom line is make not pirating more convenient and cheaper than pirating and I’ll stop doing it.

            • Copernican@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              The bottom line is make not pirating more convenient and cheaper than pirating and I’ll stop doing it.

              How do you make it cheaper than pirating?

              • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                I have to pay for and setup hardware to store and distribute media I pirate which costs money and time but I guess I didn’t really mean it had to be more convenient AND cheaper just that if there was a service that beat piracy on those two points combined I would use it. Spotify for instance has pretty much all the music I would want so I haven’t downloaded any for a few years.

      • amki@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        The analogy is that you buy a car (because if it breaks, the car and your entertainment stuff, you will buy a new one to replace it, you will also carry all maintenance) but suddenly you can’t drive backwards anymore because the manufacturer decided retroactively that you should pay extra for that (possibly in a subscription).

        I would say it is your good right then to make your car drive backwards regardless of what it may take.