Hacker News Reader

Comment by acuozzo | Hacker News Reader

> Can you offer a full throated defense of why you feel it's okay to pirate media in 2023

-- NOT OP --

In the general case, no, but consider the cases of:

1. "Altered media" e.g. (1) Star Wars, (2) THX 1138.

2. "Remixed media" e.g. (1) Terminator 2 not having its theatrical CDS mix, (2) Earthquake not having its SENSURROUND mix

3. "Omitted media" e.g. (1) Halloween not having its original mono soundtrack, (2) The Exorcist not having its original mono soundtrack

4. "Missing media" e.g. (1) The Star Wars Holiday Special, (2) HBO's "Real Sex" documentary show

5. "Censored media" e.g. (1) Fantasia, (2) Song of the South

There are entire online communities dedicated to finding, restoring, and preserving items like the ones mentioned above.

So, is piracy OK in these cases? I emphatically believe it is.

View on HN

6. Segregation. “Sorry, this content is not available in your region.”

This is an argument for changing the law, not violating the law.

It's an argument for both

I think I'd need to see more to consider it an argument for violating the law. I'm all for civil disobedience if the cause it just enough. Preserving media seems like a good idea, but it doesn't seem like something we need to break the law to get passed. Also, the civil disobedience line is really undercut but posters (some in this thread) who broadcast their real reasons for pirating have nothing to do with ethics, but fulfilling individual wants and needs without remorse.

Consider my argument here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35716469

Why would it be ok in these cases?

For the same reason removing party figures from pictures with Stalin was Not OK. Historical preservation is important, if we care about truth.

Why would it be not OK?

If art has value, then its form has value as well since art devoid of form is just communication which is no longer art.

If the form of art has value, then the original form of that art has at least as much value since it reflects the original intention of the artist which inherently has value by being part of the historical record.

If the original form of art has value, then there's value in preserving it for future generations to appreciate.

If there's value in preserving the original form of art, then there's value in distributing it widely since history has shown time and time again that copyright holders alone are not enough...

    1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_Fox_vault_fire

    2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1965_MGM_vault_fire

    3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Universal_Studios_fire

    4. https://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/bbc-archives--wiped-missing-and-lost/z4nkvk7

    5. https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/the-steely-dan-songs-on-aja-that-cant-be-remixed/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com