Hacker News Reader

Comment by sph | Hacker News Reader

o7 thank you for your service, keeping the Internet awesome and anti-corporate.

Where one piracy site dies, a thousand spawn from its corpse.

Maybe the media companies will eventually pull their heads out of their collective arses and quit their cartel, allowing the existence of legal, paid streaming sites a-la-Spotify with access to 99% of the repertoire. Until then, torrent is how we protest while they create more and more insular streaming services to milk people $9/mo at a time.

"Piracy is almost always a service problem." — Gabe Newell

(If you need a semi-private tracker that's easy to get into, try TorrentLeech. Also /r/opensignups)

View on HN

A service and a pricing problem. All cases of piracy I have observed stem from one of 3 reasons

1. Too expensive. This encompasses several varieties, like the media in question being literally priced more than the person is willing to pay, or the pricing is acceptable, but the person can buy only one of several choices and wants to evaluate all before giving one their money.

2. The product is not offered for sale. This is sometimes literally that the product isn't available for sale in your country, or the product is not available in a useful form, e.g. it doesn't come with subtitles in your language, it won't work on your device, it requires a stable internet connection, which you don't have, etc.

3. For political reasons, to avoid supporting DRM.

With the globalisation, there is actually a 4th reason rising: availability of content in specific regions. I sometimes want/need content with audio and/or subtitle language X, which is not available legally where I live, but the exact same platform does have it available in the region that speaks this language.

pirating is in this case the best solution as I can pick the quality I want, with the audio and subtitle languages I need.

I think this is just the second reason rephrased a bit differently. And it isn't at all new — pretty much all Japanese game and animation studios have refused to acknowledge our region's existence for about as long as these industries have themselves been around.

For example, Nintendo consoles have been unavailable since the 90s — which is why we've been using these clones:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendy_(console)

and are still unavailable now unless you're willing to buy consoles and games on ebay, overpriced and without warranty (which is what some of my friends have been doing, but I refuse to support publishers that consider my American dollars second class to those coming from actual Americans).

So torrents it is, then. 'Fuck you' can go both ways.

Nintendo consoles and games are available in western europe as well

This is covered in #2.

For 2, it can be the silliest things.

Disney holding back the second half of the final season of Amphibia. Released in the US but not here for unexplained reasons. For 6 months piracy was the only way to get a conclusion.

Our Flag Means Death, even though it had a large section of its cast from Britain it wasn't available to watch for far too long here.

I could go on, but you get the point. Any distribution rules are a creation of their own making in the first place.

> For political reasons, to avoid supporting DRM.

This is very much a practical reason as well, though this overlaps with "not available in a usable form". DRM is the reason I can't watch movies at the highest bitrates and resolutions on my device from Netflix or Amazon. It's the reason I can't trust that things I purchase will be available to me indefinitely. It's the reason I can't build a collection of media (e.g. with Kodi) that is playable on my TV with one click with a single unifying interface.

> The product is not offered for sale.

This extends to some other cases as well. For instance, where the only available version is a crappy remaster (Terminator 2), and the original is much superior. Or if you want to watch the film with a director's commentary.

There's also, very broadly, a 4th reason - convenience. This encompasses both ease of use (if I know what movie I want to watch, I don't have to search to see where it's streaming), and discoverability (a good torrent site will easily let you see all the movies by a director or actor, and provide recommendations). Or if you're looking for a particular special feature, it's much more convenient to be able to download it than to go looking for a physical media copy and wait for it to be shipped to your door.

Exactly. I dropped out of the torrent scene for probably around 5 years when Netflix had a huge back-catalog and it just wasn't worth the hassle to manage torrents and a media server.

Then the Netflix catalog shrunk to originals, there's now 6 different streaming services I have to juggle to watch the usual content my family likes, and we're constantly using third-party services just to figure out what's available where. I hate having to switch from Netflix to Hulu to finish out a show because the last season is only on Hulu. Or things like Warner and Disney cutting shows because they don't want to pay residuals or whatever dumb accounting BS they feel like pulling.

If you make it more convenient to torrent and shove everything into Plex, why would I pay to get a worse experience.

> Maybe the media companies will eventually pull their heads out of their collective arses and quit their cartel, allowing the existence of legal, paid streaming sites a-la-Spotify with access to 99% of the repertoire. Until then, torrent is how we protest while they create more and more insular streaming services to milk people $9/mo at a time.

I have been hearing people make this same basic argument since the 90s. (I'm sure it's older than that.) During that time the price of video and audio entertainment has decreased while availability and quality have vastly improved. Despite this, piracy is still going strong. The ideological goalposts used to justify it keep moving, but the desire for free stuff is timeless. (Not judging here -- I've certainly done my share.)

Adjusting for inflation: Twenty years ago, a DVD with one recent movie cost ~$30, or you could rent one for $5-8. One album on CD cost ~$20. Buying individual songs for the then-unheard of price of $1.65 (99 cents at the time) on iTunes was brand new. They had limited bit rate and DRM, and you had to buy an expensive iPod if you wanted to use them conveniently. If you wanted good TV shows, you paid something like $60-80/month for cable TV (more if you wanted to watch The Sopranos) and had to watch on a schedule, with lots of ads.

If you compare that to today's world of cheap streaming services, high-quality DRM-free music, and even cheaper physical media, it's not even a contest.

That's a very US centric view of the problem. Because these days if you leave the borders of your country, you'll see that the streaming world is still a fragmented archipelago of crappy B-tier licensed movies, while the good stuff people want to watch is only available in the US through a VPN.

And cable TV or films at the cinema are as expensive as ever.

Which is why Spotify has had an incredible success worldwide and music piracy has reduced dramatically: their repertoire is very comprehensive and mostly the same everywhere in the world.

People really want to believe it is a money issue, and they are just terribly misguided. Gabe Newell is absolutely right here, and he knows piracy, as he deals with the demographic with expensive needs (gamers wanting the latest $70 game) and the least money (as young gamers don't have a job, or don't earn a lot)

It is not a money problem.

>> "Piracy is almost always a service problem." — Gabe Newell

Once again; the media companies are absolutely doing everything in their power to drive even casual media consumers into piracy. I wouldn't be surprised if piracy was already more rampant than it's ever been - but it's only getting worse, due to ludicrous streaming fragmentation.

It'll never happen, but the only thing that can save piracy is an aggregate all-inclusive monthly subscription platform where all the films/shows from all services are available, just like Apple Music or Spotify. I pay $30-40/mo and I have access to all the stuff on Netflix, Prime, Max, Disney...

When you stream a movie from Netflix, they get the credit. Disney? The same.

Nobody is going to pay for all these services, and more and more are ditching them altogether. The response of the streaming services is to increase prices and reduce content. It's hilariously embarrassing. They are asking us to pirate.

> Where one piracy site dies, a thousand spawn from its corpse.

Maybe that's a bad thing. Having one central site rather than many is better for searching and availability of uploads.

> "Piracy is almost always a service problem." — Gabe Newell

I find this an odd argument in favor of pirating movies, because everything that steam offers for games, amazon prime or itunes offers for most tv shows and movies. In fact with amazon prime you can buy content and watch it on pretty much any kind of device out there.

The coverage by service for tv/movies is so much worse than games/audio, that's what makes it a service problem.

Netflix was killing pirating when it had "everything", pirating is seeing a resurgence as the landscape becomes more fractured.

Most people have moved to Plex shares these days

My experience is that 100% of what I see on friends' (and friends' friends') Plex shares is.... movies that they downloaded via TPB/RarBG/etc torrents.

If the supply of torrented content dries up, it seems like many Plex shares will start to become very stale.

Plex Shares (like ones you buy on the internet from a stranger) are mostly fully automated and pull from private/public trackers + usenet. I don't see the supply of torrents really having any effect in this regard.

Ofcourse, I'm not saying torrents don't have a place it's just that they seem less trafficked these days , online piracy streaming sites , iptv(with vod) and Plexshares have taken the front seat.

Nobody I personally know have ever heard of Plex at all. Almost everybody uses BitTorrent to some extent.

I love when thieves act like they're such noble saints.

Yeah, we all love Robin Hood books. What does your comment have to do with this thread though?

Uh, because it responded to a comment that wrote a bunch of 2009-era Guy Fawkes mask-wearing redditor bullshit that attempts to make piracy noble.

> o7 thank you for your service

(o7 would be a salute)

> Where one piracy site dies, a thousand spawn from its corpse.

False and nonsense, especially in 2023.

> Maybe the media companies will eventually pull their heads out of their collective arses and quit their cartel...

Okay, I'll stop here.

I'm fine with piracy, personally. I'd prefer we just admit that you're mostly using it to download movies, music, and television shows for free. This isn't some noble fight for freedom. We're talking about watching mindless bullshit content like Star Wars, without paying for it. Piracy proponents, and comments like the one starting this thread, make it seem like we're entitled to this content. We're not. But I'll admit, I don't watch much in the way of tv or movies any more anyway, so the whole debate is lost on me.

I just rolled my eyes at the ridiculous tone of that comment, like they're freedom fighters. It's self-important bullshit.

I love when soulless corporations bribe governments to keep a stranglehold on works of art that have impacted cultures around the world and prevent future artists from being able make more art and prevent the proper collection and preservation of these works and block the access to them, all so they can keep making money off of decades old IP.

It goes both ways. There are no Saints to be found on either side.

I don't care one bit about the pocketbooks of our corporate overlords, and neither should you.

Don't pretend you care about artists when you refuse to pay them.

You shouldn't assume what I do or do not do.

I take my kids to the movies. I subscribe to services like Apple Music and TV+, and HBO Max. We watch YouTube videos where there's sponsored content in them. We buy officially licensed merchandise like clothing and toys. We buy books, both physical and digital.

And, frankly, it doesn't matter what I do personally. Millions, hell billions, of people around the world do as well.

If artists are struggling it's because they're not getting paid properly by the corporations they work for, like Disney, Netflix, and others. It's not because of individuals like you or me or the people that run piracy sites.

This is false. Artists get paid residuals, meaning, per sale, so every non-sale due to piracy is literally coming out of artists' pockets.

Not once in the history of my consumption of digital content has me not pirating something turned into a sale.

Sometimes I pirate it, sometimes I buy it. Sometimes I consume something free instead. Sometimes I pay for the stuff I don't consume at all. But the substitution is always in the direction of cheaper, more available solution. Never in the direction of buying something.

There were cases however when me pirating something eventually turned into a sale or even few sales.

And yet, demonstrably speaking, not pirating something leads to actual sales amongst normal people.

It's truly bizarre that so many techies complain about the "cost" of artistic works while they sip their $20 lattes and go to their six-figure jobs with ergonomic chairs and free snacks.

And yet statistically speaking piracy doesn't lead to less sales. It leads to more.

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/09/eu-study-finds-piracy...

What's bizzare is that some of those rich people you mention actually internalized corporate made morality toward "intelectual property" and proselytize it as if that was their full time job.

To them piracy is and always has been theft, the way that Santa is wearing and has always been wearing red.

In fairness, somebody has to pay for the actors and the grips and the foley artists, and I'm not particularly convinced that the pirate's stance of "I want it for 20 cents, in 4k, and DRM free and if I can't have that then torrrenting it is my moral right" is either right or sustainable.

> somebody has to pay for the actors and the grips and the foley artists

They are paid. If they're not paid enough then that's on the companies behind the production of those shows and movies.

These corporations make billions. Piracy isn't hurting them. However, these corporations are causing harm to society. It doesn't make sense to white knight for them.

Many corporations make billions. That isn't an argument to not pay for the goods or services they offer.

I'll add, since I'm not the person you were replying to, I don't care about who gets paid what. I don't care if the actors get paid or not. All I care about is some basic consistency if we're going to have morals about anything. Is it wrong to steal? Yes? Then piracy is wrong. (Or, no? Then let's skip this conversation entirely, you are my enemy.) Yeah, piracy is pretty easy. Yeah, it feels harmless when we do it. Should individuals get fined tens of thousands of dollars for infractions? No. But I'd say it's about as wrong as stealing a loaf of bread from a grocery store. To pretend it's a noble cause is transparent garbage, and unless you can pose an argument that doesn't complain about how much corporations make, I'm not interested.

There appears to be nothing underpinning your worldview for why the industry you work in ought not allow open thievery, but this one should. Yes, their corporations make billions of dollars, just like in every other industry where theft is not tolerated. Or perhaps you support open thievery everywhere at any time, in which case, like I said, you are my enemy.

We disagree before your argument even begins to form. I don't believe that piracy, the act of downloading a movie, tv show, or song is stealing.

On the flip side, these corporations take from society and refuse to give back thanks to ridiculously long copyright protection terms.

They take advantage of their workers, paying a fraction of a penny to them that they make.

They screw artists over with bad contracts or lousy residuals.

They defraud investors by purposely producing works they know won't perform well.

They use things like the DMCA to bankrupt anyone that tries to write software that gets around DRM.

They threaten to sue people into oblivion that use P2P software to download something they "own."

They cover up the crimes of pedophiles and other sexual predators because they make them money.

So, again, I don't care about the pocketbooks of these corporations. I don't care that someone can download a movie without paying for it. I don't care that groups like rarbg or TPB exist.

> you are my enemy

This is exactly the type of thing an internet white knight would write. You're ridiculous.

Cool, a gish-gallop of whataboutisms. Good job.

> This is exactly the type of thing an internet white knight would write. You're ridiculous.

I'm responding to a comment that is defending another comment that said:

> o7 thank you for your service

> Where one piracy site dies, a thousand spawn from its corpse.

Et cetera. Have a nice day, enemy.

> Cool, a gish-gallop of whataboutisms. Good job.

Cool. Brushing off what I wrote instead of addressing it. Good job.

> I'm responding to a comment that is defending another comment

Then perhaps you should respond to that comment instead.

> Have a nice day, enemy.

Ah, never mind, you were in fact responding to me.

Farewell, Ser White Knight.

Ridiculous.

I agree with your plea for moral consistency, but it should be noted that describing the unlicensed copying of data as "stealing" and "thievery" is a metaphor. If I steal a car, I have denied someone else use of the car. If I pirate a film that I would never have paid for, I have enriched myself at no cost to anyone else. If I pirate a film which I would otherwise have paid for, then yes, I have impoverished the studio.

Sorry to be picky, but I think it's important to remember that intellectual "property" rights are a legal construct that societies create in an attempt to make society as a whole richer by encouraging creativity. I worry that overuse of metaphors like "property" and "theft" elevate IP to a god-given commandment (thou shalt not steal), obscuring the fact that we should design our intellectually property rights to ensure they're doing what we want. Enriching creators is not an end goal in itself.

I agree in a sense, it's a grey area, given the only crime is a person is literally copying a work and enjoying/using it. So my biggest issue with IP laws are that the potential punishments for copying do not come close to matching the crime, as they're quite draconian.

And I find it hard to believe that the spirit of these laws was intended to target end-users who copy something to watch for their own personal enjoyment, rather than to target people who copied works in an attempt to earn a profit personally. The only way the punishment fits the crime is in the latter situation, IMO. Yet I assume the laws are applied more frequently to the former situation.

> In fairness, somebody has to pay for the actors

Using open source software is stealing because in fairness somebody has to pay software developers.

Also watching ads and not buying the product is stealing because somebody has to pay the actors in those ads and people who make those ads.

Your useless copypasted comments brought nothing to this discussion. You have changed nobody's mind. Have you wrote all that to make yourself feel good?

I don't think you know how copy/paste works.

I love it when noble saints steal

Creating fake meanings for old words doesn't make them real.

They even had to go through one level of indirection to make people believe what they made up.

They couldn't just say, watching digital copy witout paying for it is a theft because people would just laugh at them, no it's not.

They had to do a two step process through obsure old crime to confuse people. Using a digital copy without paying for it is piracy. And piracy is theft.

Consuming didgital content on your own terms has as much to do with theft as it has with actual piracy that got some resurgence around Africa in recent years.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com