@boag
Theft is theft; special pleading doesn't change that. Piracy is a type of theft.
#1 Pirates didn't make copies of the cargo of the ships they captured and then let their targets go. Perhaps "piracy" is really not the term to use if you don't want your actions associated with theft.
#2 You still haven't established that any "basic rights of individuals" to access the property in question exist.
#3 The only options are never "ALL" or "NONE". The possibility of "SOME" exists. Grocery stores, for example, do not operate as EITHER having all product out unsupervised in the parking lot next to signs reading, "Please pay, or don't, your choice" OR escorting each shopper around the store under armed guard. This implies that similar mid-range solutions exist for other market scenarios. As for implying Entertainment is a right:
boag:
And choosing between restricting the rights of individuals to the extreme vs creating a free marketplace where you can obtain anything legally, which by the way are the only 2 anwsers there are to minimizing piracy, the latter will always be better than the former.
You link "restricting the rights of individuals" to an answer to "minimizing piracy", thereby implying that the "right" to the product is something that exists. Or, if I have misunderstood you and you agree that Entertainment is
not a right, then what are your grounds for justifying the act of piracy as acceptable?
#4 Falling off a cliff is a gravity problem. Putting up rails and signs helps prevent that. You can't convince gravity to change its mind; it's a natural phenomenon without agency. Theft is a personal choice. People take action based on decisions that they hold personal responsibility for. The existence of piracy is not the fault of the market, it is the fault of those who choose to steal. Why are you so set in denying the agency of thieves?
#5 None of what you said in this point is relevant. "Copyright is the legal and exclusive right to copy, or permit to be copied, some specific work of art. If you own the copyright on something, someone else cannot make a copy of it without your permission." [Source A:
https://www.whoishostingthis.com/resources/copyright-guide/] Fair Use provisions allow for parody, but the article linked makes a specific point about that with regards to music that is easily perceivable as applying to textual works as well:
Rewriting Song Lyrics for a Non-Parody Purpose
Suppose you want to write a musical, but you aren’t good at writing music. So you take songs that exist already and rewrite the words to fit your story. Unless you got permission from the copyright holder, that’s infringement.
For rewritten lyrics to be considered Fair Use, they must be a parody, which means they need to be using comedy or ridicule.
The article also discusses the criteria for something to be considered Fair Use:
The four criteria are:
1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes.
2. The nature of the copyrighted work
3 .The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
Regarding point 4, research has found that, for completed series, piracy has a negative impact on sales. [Source B:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...-effects-are-more-nuanced-than-good-bad.shtml] It does point out that anti-piracy efforts reduce sales for ongoing series, but series move from Ongoing > Completed, not the other way around. So for many, many manga series, "someone duplicating, substantially altering and FREELY DISTRIBUTING the duplicated object" is actually stealing revenue from the copyright holder. Whether such laws should exist and in what form is a different argument for a different conversation; this is how the laws exist, and violation of the law is a crime, pretty much by definition. And just to complete the point, I never equated that action with armed robbery; for example, pickpockets exist.
Finally, regarding analogies, it turns out that you will never be able to create an analogy that is "sufficient" for someone who is determined to not change their mind. The examples I have given are accurate. If you refuse to see the connections because they are inconvenient to your point, that is on you.
To conclude, piracy is an act of theft, and it is a deliberate action taken by a person with agency, not an uncontrollable natural phenomenon. Which was the point I was making in the first place.