Operating a train is not creating a train. And media does not require resources to operate, so nothing is lost when digital media is used by someone without paying.
Bruh, no one in here is arguing about legality, weāre arguing about morality, and no one but corporate shills buy into āpotential salesā having value.
Youāre trying to argue against what people just fundamentally, intuitively understand; copyright is a legal construct (not a moral one) that is 99% bullshit.
Now youāre the one being obtuse, unless youāre claiming that youāre actually arguing that you can be charged with theft, which you canāt be, because legally, copyright infringement isnāt theft.
Operating a train is not creating a train. And media does not require resources to operate, so nothing is lost when digital media is used by someone without paying.
Using, no. Acquiring, yes.
No, nothing was lost when the copy was acquired, because copying does not remove the original. Literally, nothing is lost.
Lost sales are considered damages, so yes something is lost.
EDIT: This is worse than arguing with SovCits.
Bruh, no one in here is arguing about legality, weāre arguing about morality, and no one but corporate shills buy into āpotential salesā having value.
Youāre trying to argue against what people just fundamentally, intuitively understand; copyright is a legal construct (not a moral one) that is 99% bullshit.
What are you talking about? Thatās literally the entire point of the article and this comment section.
Now youāre the one being obtuse, unless youāre claiming that youāre actually arguing that you can be charged with theft, which you canāt be, because legally, copyright infringement isnāt theft.
Yes, but then everyone started talking about morality.
What if you were never going to buy it?