Me:
In case anyone is wondering, we were having a debate as to whether my pirating of a movie costs the company or not.
Kassie's stance: If you watch the movie and don't pay for it, you are costing them money.
My stance: ... See More
Movie costs $20, they sell 10 copies
A) I purchase a copy, making 11 sales, totaling $220
B) I don't think the movie is worth purchasing, but I don't pirate it either, making 10 sales, totaling $200
C) I don't think the movie is worth buying, but I feel its worth pirating, making 10 sales, totaling $200.
My stance is that A isn't even a possibility here. I absolutely will not buy this movie, whether I pirate it, don't watch it at all, or watch at a friend's house who did buy it.
So, comparing B with C, Whether I pirate the movie or just plain not watch the movie with purchasing the movie never even being an option, the company makes the exact same amount of money. The only would make a different amount if I ever intended on buying it in the first place, which I did not.
Him:
The bottom line is you receive the benefit of the movie without paying for it. So while the movie company doesn't actually lose money because you wouldn't have bought anyway they still have to pay to make movies (that you watch) so they end up charging the rest of us more. So essentially all the rest of us who actually pay for movies are paying so you can watch it without paying. So no you're not costing them money. you're costing us money.
Me:
I cost you the same amount of money as if I had not watched the movie at all, though. No possible way I could cost you more money if my two choices were pirate the movie or not watch the movie at all.
Or we can say I go to a friend's house, who did buy the movie, and watch it there or borrow it from him instead of buying the movie. All would result in the same cost on your part.
Him:
If you paid for the movies you watched they would cost me less.
Me:
Yes, but paying isn't an option. My only two choices are pirate or don't watch at all. Under no circumstance am I going to pay. At best, if I didn't pirate a movie, I would find someone who did have the movie and borrow it from them.
My point that pirating would do the exact same as if I would borrow it from someone, not watch the movie at all... See More, or even watched it on youtube.
In our discussion, Kassie was saying that if I had went and watched it at a friend's house who did have it, that it would be different than if I just downloaded it.
Him:
If everyone pirated movies there would be no more movies. Everything else is just a matter of degree. So once again . . . when you enjoy the benefit of something without paying for it (or your friend paying for it) someone has to support that activity if it is going to continue. That someone is everyone else.
Me:
I think you're missing the point though, which is, if I did not pirate the film, or watch it at a friend's house, then I would not watch the film at all.
This is different from someone who was planning on buying the film but then pirates instead, because they were actually intending on giving their money to the company, but in my case I would ... See Morenot.
Let's say pirating did not exist. I would prefer not to watch the movie at all then. There are cheaper forms of entertainment and I would pick up one of those. So again, i hurt people the exact same amount as if I had decided not to watch the movie at all, because if pirating were not around, I sure would not be watching all these movies.
Him:
The fact that you would not watch the film is immaterial. You are watching it and I am paying for it.
Using your logic stealing ANYTHING is ok if you wouldn't be using it if you hadn't stolen it. Let's just take your first Paragraph and replace film with car
I think you're missing the point though, which is, if I did not steal the car, or borrow it from a friend, then I would not drive the car at all.
... See More
Or shoplifting food
I think you're missing the point though, which is, if I did not steal the food, or eat it at a friend's house, then I would not eat the food at all.
Just because you wouldn't use something if you didn't steal it doesn't make it ok to steal it
Me:
Your example doesn't apply here though. Let's say I steal a car or shoplift food. That car is gone, and so is the food. We can even use the DVD as an example. If I go into the store and steal a DVD that is a DVD they cannot sell. If I download a duplicated file, nothing disappears, and there is nothing that cannot be sold as a result of my downloading it.
It isn't a fair or proper comparison with something that has limited supply and something in which there is infinite supply.
Let's go with your car example. My two choices are steal a car or walk. i will absolutely not purchase a car. If I steal a car, this is a physical car that is gone. It was somebody's car. If I had never purchased a car or if I stole a car, there is actually a difference in the amount earned now, unlike my earlier example with the amount earned if I had not watched the movie at all or if I watched it at a friend's house.... See More
Now, to reinforce my stance on this. I'm not saying it isn't stealing. I'm not saying it's right. I'm not saying it's legal. I'm saying I cause the exact same damage as someone who chooses not to watch the movie at all. This is not the same case with the car, as if I steal one off the lot.
Movie: Money not earned vs money not earned
Car: Money not earned (me not buying it) vs money in the red (the car that is now missing and they have to replace).