this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2024
1368 points (95.7% liked)

memes

10454 readers
4429 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TAYRN 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yes, I said from the start that it might not be moral.

But that's exactly the point: companies sell movies to theaters, and then those theaters sell tickets to each viewer. That's the license they each agreed to. A theater buying a movie off Amazon and then selling tickets to everyone who watched it would probably make some people upset, and would very clearly be illegal.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Talk about mental gymnastics.

You cant sell a limited time license. That is rent, plain and simple. If you pay 3 years rent at once or monthly, its still rent.

If you pay for something and have to give it back, you dont actually become the „owner“.

And thats why people say if buying isnt owning, piracy isnt theft, plain and simple.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Renting generally refers to physical goods, with the following property: when it’s being used by one party, it’s unavailable to everyone else.

For intellectual property, things that can be used by N people without interference between them, the term limited license is correct.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Its still manipulative to call it „selling“ or „owning“.