I used to agree with the anti-piracy mindset, however after thinking of real-life analogues to digital piracy I find it absurd.
For example - let's say you legally purchased a painting from an art exhibit. You then xeroxed it and gave a copy to your friends; and afterwards the artist tried to sue your friends claiming they "stole" his painting. That seems absurd to me.
Or if a car dealership legally sold you a car, but told you you aren't allowed to let anyone else drive it but yourself, or else you'll be sued for 6 figure amounts.
To me the only difference in what's actually being done is that the person is copying and sharing it online, and with a lot more people, as opposed to just sharing it with a few people they know personally. (Obviously I'm not talking about instances in which something was illegally leaked online - I'm talking about instances in which a person legally purchased music, DVDs, etc and then shared them online).
Sure it's definitely worth taking into account that this action might harm the musicians, directors, etc by causing them to lose money (especially in the case of independent artists) - however the arguments against it seem more to be based on what the end result of the activity is, rather than whether or not the action really amounts to theft.
What is your view on this?
For example - let's say you legally purchased a painting from an art exhibit. You then xeroxed it and gave a copy to your friends; and afterwards the artist tried to sue your friends claiming they "stole" his painting. That seems absurd to me.
Or if a car dealership legally sold you a car, but told you you aren't allowed to let anyone else drive it but yourself, or else you'll be sued for 6 figure amounts.
To me the only difference in what's actually being done is that the person is copying and sharing it online, and with a lot more people, as opposed to just sharing it with a few people they know personally. (Obviously I'm not talking about instances in which something was illegally leaked online - I'm talking about instances in which a person legally purchased music, DVDs, etc and then shared them online).
Sure it's definitely worth taking into account that this action might harm the musicians, directors, etc by causing them to lose money (especially in the case of independent artists) - however the arguments against it seem more to be based on what the end result of the activity is, rather than whether or not the action really amounts to theft.
What is your view on this?