May 23, 2021, 15:48 pm
Anarchemist [whom I 100% agree with] wrote "If it were not for this site and torrents, chances are I would just forget Rifftrax exists at all. I bet a lot of people would."
There's the notion that if we weren't DL-ing this stuff, we'd pay for it. Thus it's theft. But this is easily understood to be false. 2 examples.
1] A grocery store may be giving away a cookie in order to entice you to buy a dozen. You may take one. But what if they charged .25 cents? Would you be willing to buy it, now that it's not free? Most (I venture) wouldn't.
2] Some religious groups on the street have something similar; they offer you a book of their teachings for free. You take it. Then they ask "Would you care to make a donation?"
My point is, there's a crucial conflation going on in the economic logic when our critics presume, "These illegal downloaders would be buying this legally, if it weren't for torrents, &c." This just isn't the case, whatever the morality: it's just demonstrably false. We'd just move on to something else.
There's the notion that if we weren't DL-ing this stuff, we'd pay for it. Thus it's theft. But this is easily understood to be false. 2 examples.
1] A grocery store may be giving away a cookie in order to entice you to buy a dozen. You may take one. But what if they charged .25 cents? Would you be willing to buy it, now that it's not free? Most (I venture) wouldn't.
2] Some religious groups on the street have something similar; they offer you a book of their teachings for free. You take it. Then they ask "Would you care to make a donation?"
My point is, there's a crucial conflation going on in the economic logic when our critics presume, "These illegal downloaders would be buying this legally, if it weren't for torrents, &c." This just isn't the case, whatever the morality: it's just demonstrably false. We'd just move on to something else.