• 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

                  The only response you’ve given is “that’s not harmful”, which is in no way an argument for why it isn’t. It’s not totally inconceivable that taking things, even data, without permission can be harmful and to claim otherwise seems willfully stupid and in this case self serving.

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

                  The only response you’ve given is “that’s not harmful”, which is in no way an argument for why it isn’t. It’s not totally inconceivable that taking things, even data, without permission can be harmful and to claim otherwise seems willfully stupid and in this case self serving.

        • 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.

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

                  making a copy of Frozen is not.

                  I feel like I’ve been pretty clesr that this sort of example is not what I’m talking about…

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

                    than you are not talking about piracy and this is not the place for that discussion.

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

                  piracy is distributing copies of publicly available media.

                  Arguably software, films and music aren’t “publically available” in the sense that they’re only conditionally available to the public (ignoring piracy).

                  But okay, lets take the pornographic example. Say they occasionally sell nude photos to acquaintances too. Now the photos are in some sense “publicly available” in the sense that some people can buy them. Is it now suddenly okay to pirate this media? If so, then why?

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

                  Did you not read my very first example where I claimed almost exactly that. What have you been thinking I was talking about?