In my opnion - piracy can be justified. I think saying its evil isnt true. For example video game companies that dont sell certain games anymore, I think in that case piracy is justified.
However, if there’s easily accessible ways to acsess the media legally, then its not justified.
So pirating media like Big Finish which is all available directly from their website? Not justified.
Pirating old video games that cant be legally obtained? Justified.
Saying “it’s ok to pirate if you can’t afford it” is opening that up to abuse though. What if I can’t afford it because I bought something else? Should it be okay to pirate if I just don’t want to spend money on it?
Also it’s a bit like saying (although I know a 1:1 comparison with physical objects doesn’t work, “you wouldn’t steal a car” etc) that I can’t afford a Ferrari so it’s ok for me to steal one.
If everyone felt that way, then Big Finish would not make any money, they’d have to stop making audios, and everyone would be sad.
So if you can’t afford it, save up. If you can’t save up, wait til it’s on sale. Or find it at a library or listen on Spotify or borrow it from a friend. Or just go without.
Speaking as a librarian, piracy is preservation. (There’s even some Big Finish stuff that’s only around in pirated form because they lost the license or just sold out of it.)
Speaking as a Big Finish fan, don’t screw over small companies.
Yeah, honestly. I find it a bit strange how people can get angry at streaming services who remove exclusive shows (or outright delete them from their archive), but then get mad that pirates made those same shows freely available on piracy websites into perpetuity.
Likewise, consumers who decry the rising cost of streaming sites, their influx of ads, how something they wanted to see got removed (because these sites are on a constant rotating wheel of what they keep in their library), and how certain shows that they really want to see aren’t on one the five other streaming sites they already pay for, but think it’s weird that some people (especially those who don’t watch much tv to justify the cost of a subscription) would rather just freely watch the one show or film they want to see and go on their way. Why should people be forced to purchase a(nother) streaming subscription just to watch one show[1]? At least when only cable existed, you got everything in one package.
and this definitely applies for shows that are not current, so watching them would have no affect on any viewing numbers ↩︎
Okay yes I agree that “evil” is a harsh way to describe it. But probably “selfish” is better.
(Because by pirating you’re not contributing anything to compensate all those involved, and you’re actually making it less likely future stories will be commissioned, so you’re ruining it for everyone else. Just because you have FOMO about missing a story you can’t afford doesn’t give you the right to take it without paying).
I’m on the fence about piracy. I do especially understand in the realm of video games though. I totally understand the “I paid for this game and now the publisher took it away” mentality.
I want to pose a question I’ve been wondering about for a while. Those who are against any form of piracy or digital preservation, why do you use the Internet Archive to access DWM, DWA, etc? Technically there are ways to purchase that content on online marketplaces, and correct me if I’m wrong but even though those issues are OOP they’re still within copyright. By continuing to use the Archive to view and download that media, you are likely supporting the efforts of a pirate.
Piracy & digital preservation are the same thing now? 
In @snakesontoast’s post where they said “piracy helps preserve lost media” you made a laugh emoji. I interpret that you are against this considering you don’t seem to be “liking” any of the pro-piracy posts.
Either way, the two go hand in hand. Archive users are preserving old DWM, but they are still within copyright (again, correct me if I’m wrong). By accessing those files, you are skirting copyright. You can digitally preserve a show from the 1970s that is no longer being aired, but it is likely still within copyright (in the case if you wanted to post it anywhere).
That wasn’t all that was said in that particular post, the idea that “if you pirate it you can get other people to buy through word of mouth” is laughable.
& this discussion arose from BF piracy. That ain’t preservation.
There are other people in this discussion talking about things outside BF.
In my opinion there is a big difference between looking at old magazines which are no longer possible to purchase in a way that pays the original authors (buying from eBay does not do that), and pirating something which is still easy to buy from the original authors.
I know there are.
I don’t understand why you are being tetchy with me in particular. I am trying to have a friendly discussion.
Pirating as a form of promotion is certainly a new take…
If you can’t afford something, you miss out. FOMO doesn’t make piracy okay.
Apologies if it came across like that.
I dont really want to continue having this discussion. Please don’t continue to involve me 
Anyway, here’s something odd I just noticed, but maybe one of you knows the explanation for it. (If not, I could actually ask BF, but why take the easy route?)
Shipping to the US for the 13DA bundle is $74.13, or $6.18 per CD. But shipping for one individual CD is $4.12. Obviously the bundle shipping is going to be higher than one order of 12 CDs, since they come in 12 shipments, but I’d expect it to be roughly on par with 12 x the individual shipping. Anyone know the reasoning here?
