bananaoil wrote:Wataru,
That's a cute graphic and all, but piracy in this case is theft of legally protected information. Granted, many artists are perfectly fine with and endorse the disbursement of their art through free channels, and if that's how they want to share their work, God speed to them. However, other artists want to legally protect their creations because of the time, resources, and money they've exhausted to develop their product and because they don't want third parties profiting off of what they've made. Film corporations own films because they essentially contract creative teams to make their productions. Then, after paying the creative teams for their contracted labor, they try to make a return on their investment via exhibition in theaters and through home media. Often times, exhibition through home media can salvage the initial investment when a film bombs at the box office. The return on the investment is used to pay the people running the corporation, to pay the bills, and to fund future production investments. This model guarantees the existence of commercial art, which in turn allows all manner of artists the opportunity to practice their respective crafts. Just like any other industry, this model isn't perfect, and corporations can and do get greedy. But that doesn't justify the unlawful theft of their property through piracy, no matter how old their product is. Corporations and artists may sometimes be guilty of greed, but pirates are always guilty of covetousness and theft. Grow up and get a moral compass. If someone doesn't want you to use their product without their consent or compensation, move on.
Thank you. He's posted that pic several times, and I find it naive at best. It completely misses the point of what piracy is and does. It just comes off as a ignorant excuse for being ignorant.
