• myslsl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The ethical issue here has nothing to do with damaging any property at all.

      • stappern@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It has all tp do with it. Why would something be unethical if nobody is hurt ?

        • myslsl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Why would something be unethical if nobody is hurt?

          Why are you conflating damaging property with causing harm? It’s at least arguable that an invasion of privacy is harmful, regardless of whether or not property damage occurs.

          • stappern@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No privacy is being invaded so… no.

            Nobody is hurt by that process. how could it be unethical?

            • myslsl@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              In my example privacy invasion definitely occurs. If you disagree with that, then you should review what I initially said.

              If the notion that when people don’t want to share things with you, you have an unqualified right to take those things, and that doing that is just inherently not damaging, then I think your position is unrealistic and incredibly self serving.

              Do you have some point to make here besides claiming you’re just never doing anything wrong when it serves your interests?

              • stappern@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                My point is nobody is hurt. So it’s not unethical.

                No privacy is being violated by obtaining a copy of a publicly available software.

                • myslsl@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Your point is wrong. My point is that you can’t always (ethically) just copy other peoples stuff, just like you can’t always just take things from people. My point is not that piracy is never justified. My point is not that you are personally doing something wrong by pirating things. My point is not that you can’t be justified in copying other peoples stuff sometimes without permission. My point is not that piracy or copying other peoples data and documents always causes harm.

                  Edit: When was pirating “publically available” software specifically ever central to my point?

                  • stappern@lemmy.one
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    how? i mean you are just saying its wrong, you haven’t said anything or explained why.

            • myslsl@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Here’s another example. Say a person makes pornographic photos and videos for their significant other, suppose that content gets leaked onto the internet and is uploaded to popular torrent sites without their permission. How is piracy of this sort of content not an invasion of privacy? How is piracy of this sort of content not unethical?

              • stappern@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                wut??? nobody in their right mind downloads that stuff! that is NOT what we are talking about, we are talking about movies and games and music

                you really made this up out of nowhere. nobody defends distribuiting private pictures of people… and BTW in that case is not piracy by definition…

                • myslsl@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  wut??? nobody in their right mind downloads that stuff! that is NOT what we are talking about, we are talking about movies and games and music

                  I felt like it was pretty clear that I was not talking about things as small as pirating a couple movies and games from multimillion dollar companies?

                  you really made this up out of nowhere. nobody defends distribuiting private pictures of people… and BTW in that case is not piracy by definition…

                  Is it not piracy? Please clarify the difference to me?

                  • stappern@lemmy.one
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    piracy is distributing copies of publicly available media.

                    accessing a private device and making copies of personal content inside is illegal and unethical.

                    making a copy of Frozen is not.