Hacker News Reader

Comment by sbarre | Hacker News Reader

> People in other regions where this stuff isn't available have every right to copy it without paying.

I think you've got this wrong. The people in other regions don't have "every right to copy it", they have "every right to not consume it". Don't like the rules? Don't play. It's their content, so they set the rules. That's kind of all there is to it. I absolutely agree that you can be pissed off about this and not like it though.

But nothing gives you the "right" to force your way into someone else's party just because you weren't invited, or didn't like the ticket price. If you think like that, you're as much of a dick as the people you seem to be mad at.

So unless you are using the word "unethical" in an ironic fashion when you describe what they do, you probably should not use it at all if you're then going to condone what is essentially an unethical response yourself.

View on HN

>The people in other regions don't have "every right to copy it", they have "every right to not consume it". Don't like the rules? Don't play. It's their content, so they set the rules.

>But nothing gives you the "right" to force your way into someone else's party just because you weren't invited, or didn't like the ticket price.

Completely wrong on both counts.

If I'm not invited to someone else's party, but I want to observe it without interfering with the partygoers, I have every right to invent a device which allows me to create an artificial wormhole which then allows me to remotely observe this party (see the Arthur C. Clarke book "Light of Other Days"). The partygoers will have no idea I'm observing them and since they wouldn't sell me a ticket anyway, they won't see a difference in their revenues.

Similarly, if content holders don't bother to offer their wares to me and then make it too difficult for me to acquire them with a workaround (subscription + VPN), then I have every right to download a copy. As above, they have no idea that I'm watching their content, and since they didn't offer it to me for sale anyway, they won't see a difference in their revenues.

>if you're then going to condone what is essentially an unethical response yourself.

I'm not condoning an unethical response, I'm condoning an ethical one. Ethics are in the eye of the beholder; for some people, it's completely ethical to hack someone's head off if they don't follow the correct religion. I choose to reject your system of ethics which grants all power to large, moneyed interests.

> I have every right to invent a device which allows me to create an artificial wormhole which then allows me to remotely observe this party (see the Arthur C. Clarke book "Light of Other Days"). The partygoers will have no idea I'm observing them and since they wouldn't sell me a ticket anyway, they won't see a difference in their revenues.

Voyeurism may or may not be a crime in your jurisdiction.

That really depends on the exact laws and how they're worded, and what kind of party this is. A party which involves ticket sales (as was stipulated before) is not a private house party, this is the kind of party that happens at a club and is something that's "open to the general public" (just like a concert or movie), so I don't think voyeurism laws would apply here. There's no expectation of privacy in a setting like this; anyone is allowed to enter, as long as they pay the ticket price and don't exceed the venue's capacity. So if you come up with a way of looking inside the place, getting the viewing experience everyone else has there, without trespassing in any way or interfering with other people there, I don't see how it could be a crime unless they invent a new law to address it.

Here's another thought experiment, but using modern tech: suppose there's a party like this (open to the public, tickets required to enter), and there's no rules at the club forbidding cameras or communication devices. If you pay the ticket price, you're allowed to enter and take photos all you want as long as you don't disturb people and make a nuisance of yourself. (I'm pretty sure any normal bar or club these days is just like this; people take photos of themselves at bars all the time.)

You don't want to pay the ticket price to get in, but you want to see what's going on there. Your friend however wants to go in, so he buys a ticket and enters. While inside, he whips out his phone, and activates an app which contacts your phone, and then streams live video from his phone's camera to your phone. You're now able to see and hear what's going on in the party without buying a ticket, apparently legally. Fast-forward a few years and instead of watching your buddy's video stream on your 5" phone screen, you're watching it on a VR headset, so it's almost like being there. My wormhole idea isn't much different from this; it just doesn't require a confederate.

Point here is, all of this doesn't matter. The market doesn't care about "ethics" or whatever. The market only knows one thing: Demand.

And it will do whatever it takes to satisfy this demand. If this happens to be "subscribing to your awesome streaming service", well then good for you! If not, too bad, the market DOES NOT CARE about you.

So you can now either spend your money on lobbying to get these people into jail or try to expand your market and get the people's money into your pockets. The latter being obviously the better choice for both you and your future customers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com