Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54565 readers

502 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):

💰 Please help cover server costs.


Ko-fi	Liberapay

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

419

Is music piracy dying? (vlemmy.net)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

327 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Most of the discussion and sources of content talk about movies and series.

I've been recently looking for psy and techno music, finding FLAC or WAV with active seeders feels like striking gold. It's definitely been a while since I've looked for active torrent sites and it feels more barren than ever.

Edit: Thank you all for all that valuable information. The reddit group really wasn't this helpful and valued making fun over adding real use able knowledge.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

There's no reason ToC has any correlation with an ethical framework, just like laws against gay marriage don't make gay marriage unethical. They're merely corporate decisions made by men in suits. Being ethical and being against ToC or against the law are nowhere near the same thing.

My ethical framework is about driving the world towards overall happiness of all people.

If I, instead of loading the file in FLAC 200 times from Deezer's servers, locally save it and replay it in my music player, all the while paying for the service so I could actually stream it 200 times if I wanted to - I don't see who's being hurt by this.

Does that make sense?

Now if the ToC says "don't do this, instead use our bandwidth as we want you to use it, but don't save our file" then instead of blindly accepting that, I read between the lines of why they don't want that.

Which seems fairly obvious: they want you to keep paying for the service monthly to keep your access to the content. And thus I keep paying monthly, as I have for years now.

If I stop paying and don't delete the content? Yes, then it does become unethical. I'm not planning to do that. But I'd still argue it's not nearly as unethical as using their servers without paying for access - because you're not inducing any costs for the company.

If your ethical framework is about "respecting corporate ToCs" yet don't mind making people use fake credit cards then I don't really know what to say anymore.