this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
259 points (71.3% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

56747 readers
185 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

🏴‍☠️ Other communities

Torrenting:

Gaming:


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Most people have extremely weird ideas of what's considered piracy and what isn't. Downloading a video game rom is piracy, but if you pay money to some Chinese retailer for an SD card containing the roms, that's somehow not piracy. Exploiting the free trial on a streaming site by using prepaid visa cards is somehow not piracy either. Torrenting an album is piracy, but listening to a bootleg on YouTube isn't.

YouTube noticed this at some point and is now happy to let everyone know how much pirated music is available on their site. One of their main points for shilling YouTube premium is how their music catalogue is way better than Spotify. Of course the piracy site has more. That's always how it works. Spotify actually has to license the music on their platform and is subject to copyright law. They can't just get the Neil Young discography from soulseek one day and wait until his estate notices, facing no repercussions whatsoever aside from agreeing to a takedown request. Imagine if Pirate Bay or Napster were considered completely above-board businesses just because they took down torrents if explicitly requested by the copyright holders.

Not that I'm complaining especially when a lot of the music on youtube isn't publicly accessible anywhere else. It's just been extremely strange to see this go from an "open secret" to something they're shouting from the rooftops and face no repercussions for. In the future I want everything to be like that and I'd rather keep youtube how it is than see them get the punishment that by all rights they should be getting. It's just so strange that this is the position things have ended up in.

Note: The following text is intentional abuse of the tagginator bot. Fuck you.

#ADHD #BOSTON #NYC #OpenSource #FOSS #SelfHosted #Soccer #3dprinting #Memes #GodotEngine #Unity #UnrealEngine

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TootSweet@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A lot of technologies started out as pirate technologies.

Cable TV? The first people who started shoving TV over cables into people's homes didn't ask for permission. But now that's such a normal thing that we can't imagine it having been infringement at one point.

Player piano rolls too. No permission was sought and its legality wasn't figured out until they got sued. (And the courts decided that a royalty to the composers or rights holders was in order, and the courts set the going royalties rate in cents per roll, but they also decided the composers/rights holders couldn't deny any player piano roll maker the right to make player piano rolls of their songs.)

But then things shifted and now the courts are owned by Disney.

[–] seaturtle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago

Hell, Crunchyroll was a pirate site until it converted into not being one.

[–] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

its a resource like any other. use it, abuse it... while you can. with the impending browser restrictions the world might change a bit. a tiny bit.

[–] jeena@jemmy.jeena.net 3 points 1 year ago

Not if people would wake up and just use freaking Firefox which Google has not (that great of) control over. I feel it's such a simple solution but somehow the Internet users collectively seem to have decided that they'd rather enjoy ads.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Paying money is technically bootlegging, which I would argue is massively worse than piracy. But only because piracy is whatever.

[–] 1Fuji2Taka3Nasubi@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago

Is my understanding correct that Youtube only cares about paying the music right holders? (Because those complains the loudest?) That is, if someone creates an AMV by combining audio and visuals from different sources and uploads it to Youtube, Youtube only gives the monetize profit to the song owner, but not the visuals rights owners?

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

As long as they get to profit from it and not you, then it's not piracy for them. If a record label wanted to sue Google, they would have a hell of a time.

[–] veniasilente@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

What's your beef with the tagginator bot? It's certainly better than the reddit repost bots, right?

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›