Itt we mock idiots who still believe in (((intellectual property)))

[citation needed]
No, I can invent a method for creating this thing 5 times cheaper myself, I might have supply issues at first but that's fine because as a small business there won't be the demand at first.
Take the Arduino for example, I can take the blueprints and code and build a cheaper version in my house (people have done this, it is verifiably cheaper) and sell it to my friends at a lower price than the Arduino guys.

my grandfather owns coin op car wash business. Patents help him make money on the side for parts he machined and discovered were necessary to build. helps his income greatly even to this day. i know this is anecdotal since im speaking from my own family. i know a few others who were saved as well from it. patents have their place is all im saying. you cant just say "no more patents" it robs people of their time and effort. i think we all can agree, however, that there should be more specific patents laws to prevent abuse such as in software is the biggest abuse i know of.

he built it from the ground up and discovered parts necessary/better to make it** my bad forgot to put that in second sentence lol

Essential reading.
levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/againstfinal.htm

This thread needs more people defending copyright (so they can be mocked)

...

No you are just slapping endless bandages on the problem rather than tackling the root cause. It's a hacky fix that makes it look like the problem goes away but it doesn't, it just breaks later down the line.

I dont think its necessary to explain random machined pieces such as unions, threaded fasteners etc etc that size different size threads together or attach them at 90 degree angles or various other things that helped make his layout of what he built work. i furthermore dont understand how me not explaining this to you makes me jewish unless you actually were never loved as a child.

i dont think getting rid of it entirely is a smart fix either, people do deserve compensation for their ingenuity/hard work in cases of more physical items, software is definitely problematic though. i dont get how patching it rather than just "fuck every person who ever made something" is a worse solution

The 'lone inventor' is a meme, and part of the American dream propaganda.
In reality corporations would do an end run around your one patent, and crush you in court.
Patents are truly a creation of the jews.

Nice argument, faggot. You throw around lines like "people do deserve compensation for their ingenuity/hard work," then act like patenting is the only way inventors and business owners make an income. Trust me, it isn't. Your grandfather already made money from his carwashing business and if you tell me he would have failed without patents, guess what: that means he's a bad businessman who relied on the crutch of intellectual property to survive.
Thoughts and ideas are immaterial, and naturally spread from person to person. The first man or sentient organism thought "what will I eat today?" and so did billions or even trillions after him. Just because someone thought about lunch ages ago does not mean your thought is "owned" by them: it's your thought in your mind, whether you're influenced by other hungry people or not.
Intellectual property is a forced meme, a social construct, a spook, all those labels describe the concept well. It's the strange idea that the first person or corporation who thinks a thought, makes something inspired by a thought, or walks down to an office and files some paperwork related to a thought, somehow owns that thought and has both moral and legal right to to fuck over anyone who decides to implement or tweak their idea. The concept is recent and peddled by people with sob stories of inventors with bad business savy. If only he had intellectual gibs for his idea!
Bullshit. Even in the age of patents, inventors still get fucked over by corporations and end up penniless, patents just give the greedy a tool to fuck over their opponents even harder. It's grown so out of hand that developers of open standards are forced to patent their own innovations just to keep some greedy fuck from claiming the rights and fucking over everyone else.

Lots of ad hominems and mindless drivel. also your green text is just intellectually dishonest. also lots of implications. have you ever thought about sticking to the issue? or are you that mad at my opinion? First off, ill address that your butthurt at my comment and "hurr durr da jooz" initial comment to my story made me think that your overreaction stems from something during youth (or current ongoing due to still being under 18) both are viable. he wouldve survived, however, why does he not deserve money for his hardwork/ingenuity in making these items? Hes never sued anyone in his life. Were talking about 2 different things i believe. youre talking about patenting thoughts, he patented a physical, tangible object. i agree with you on patents that dont meet this criteria. to use your metaphor, i dont believe people should own the idea of lunch however i believe they should be able to own an establishment that sells lunch. i agree a lot of people dont do patents the right way either which leaves them fucked over by corporations.

Patent law covers this. A patent must be something that isn't obvious to experts in the field.
I didn't read the rest of your verbal diarrhea.

No, calling someone greedy or suggesting your grandfather wasn't the best businessman is not an ad hominem.
pic related

Yes, that explains the patents for basic UI elements like loading bars.

You keep returning to the "inventors deserve money for their hard work and ingenuity" chestnut, but you're ignoring something big: with or without patents, your grandfather profited off his ideas and work through his business. Whether he profited off patents through lawsuits or people paying royalties to use his pieces is irrelevant, the fact is that he used patents as a secondary income and would have survived without them unless he was incompetent.
If you want to make money off your ideas, be productive and make stuff using your ideas like your grandfather. It's not a complicated concept, and if you absolutely need government-enforced intellectual property to make a profit you're either incompetent or should find some other income.

i agree with you that he didnt need it, but why should he not be able to profit off of it if he made it?

you resort to calling people faggots and insinuating unrelated things such as my grandfathers business capabilities based on my opinion that theres nothing wrong with him owning and profiting, or your writing a massive wall of text for no reason. of all youve wrote, youve made like 2 valid points, as
said you have a lot of verbal diarrhea

Again, he did profit from it through his business. Do you even read the posts you respond to or are you too busy getting offended?

nice try Schlomo. Free sotfware is communism.

purposely dodging the question asked. you and i both know he made money from his business. im not offended, its just irrelevant.

(cont) its things like this and all the people on here that think nuclear power are examples of blemishes on this otherwise wonderful site.

Your tactics are bedazzling.

sorry i guess i shouldve been more specific since youre really going to play this game due to lack of substance. Why should he not be able to make the part his propery, produce and sell it and profit off of it on top of his business.

There's absolutely nothing stopping him from doing that, and he doesn't need patents to produce and sell parts either.

why should someone else be able to take what he makes, undercut, and sell it? why should he not have protection from the government and legal documents preventing this?

because property rights make no sense when you're talking about things that can be infinitely reproduced at no cost

but material for various mechanical fittings do cost money?

no, Jamal, everything just drops from the sky in a magic cargo container if the Cargo Gods are pleased with you.

If someone else can make the same parts your grandfather does but better, why should he need the government to handicap everyone else? He should improve his own service and production pipeline instead of relying on a government-enforced monopoly on .

more purposeful subject evasion

if they make a better version, that version is not the same and thus they can patent that and sell it. but some big company shouldnt be able to use chink and pajeet children to mass produce his things for far less money due to abundance of resources.

That problem should be solved with tariffs and import taxes, not patent laws which won't stop the chinese.

Nice hypothetical examples from pre-information age.
"Man invents widget" hasn't be relevant for a long time. You shitty widget can be 3D printed for cents, and only state violence can stop that.

Until you force doctors and scientists to work for free I can't take you seriously.

You can't use open source programs for mission critical applications without lengthy debugging and regulations, not to mention the massive fucking security risks that must be watched out for constantly. It isn't worth the effort.

Your life support programs are never going to be cripple source. Get over it.

Doctors get paid a wage which doesn't depend on patents.
The locking up of publicly funded science papers is another travesty of (((intellectual property))).

That right there is your worst case scenario.

Doctors get paid a wage based on their adherence to the whims of big pharma.

Over-glamorized drug pushers. They absolutely should be paid based on the quality of care provided to patients.

And in case you forgot, there are plenty of research scientists who don't use public funds.

No fuck that. The US has the worst health care among developing nations. Insurance based healthcare is the 3rd pillar of judaism.

E=MC^2 is patented by Einstein and shieeet

Pythagoras says you pay him royalty every time you use his theorem

Remember when China gave NK their nuclear technology?

I remember.

Remove insurance companies from the equation all together

Healthcare patents are a crime against humanity.

Copyleft licenses like the GPL rely on the concept of IP just as much and in the same ways as copyright and patents.

Patents are dumb.
The idea of a inverse-patent is better:

...

They're called coincidence marks, git gud before you start accusing people of being shills

Yes, but they're as good as it gets so long as we have intellectual property. Abolishing intellectual property entirely largely obsoletes this.

The free market strikes again

Your an idiot if you don't apply the same level of caution, if not more to proprietary software, because you can't even audit that.

Because that's literally how the market progresses retard

In a world without IP laws and enforcement, the only relevant licenses will be ones like the BSD license which are nothing more than liability waivers. No one is going to care if you slap a GPL-esque license file in with your open source code, they will use it in their closed source program and there wont be a single fucking thing you can do to stop them. Likewise there is nothing the owner of a closed source program can do to stop people from using his source code in other programs, so its a double edged sword.

...

This side of the sword is entirely worth it

>The locking up of publicly funded science papers is another travesty of (((intellectual property))).
Frankly the most disgusting one of all to me.

lol this is like an anarchist supporting communism or a libertarian supporting fascism

The GPL is a temporary solution that harms our enemies' interests until our ideas can be fully realised.
So yes, it's like ancoms supporting communism, which mind you, is quite common ('left unity', 'nonsectarianism' etc)

this isn't /gnussr/.
you could have said that without the Holla Forums shit and itd still be correct. "IP is cancer, the GPL uses it to prevent its use on the work or any derivative works of it, so noone can put retarded IP law restrictons on it in the future."
"IP law should not exist. If you just pretend it doesnt exist, other people(companies) will still abuse it. Its better to use it against itself, by using it to place one restriction: that noone else may use IP to place restrictions on the work or derivatives of it."
That would be correct.
posting political shit with a side is going to start fights that dont need to happen.

I understand user and I'm loling @ the idea

So instead of making it public domain, presumably the end state you want without IP. You're using a restrictive license but just doing so ironically.
That's an interesting strategy user.

Yeah. Its more because using IP law to "protect" your intellectual """property""" isnt a valid personal choice, as implied by BSD style freedom, because its not legitimate "property." Imposing restrictions on the use of the information is just taking advantage of the governments coercion to curtail everyone elses natural, legitimate freedom.
the best way to prevent that is to use that law itself to forbid the placing of such restrictions. The ideal would be a worl din which the government didnt recognize IP, but we dont live in such a world.
I reiterate all this because I feel im shit at explaining things and think this is a better way to put it

Every time I see this point of view it makes me more sure that if the GPL could get what it wanted it would be the most restrictive license you could imagine. And it would be pursued vigorously through the legal system.
And I think the people who have this idea that it's about freedom are as delusional as the two groups I mentioned earlier.

...

Not an argument user.
That view is only not total bullshit if "intellectual property" was right and natural, and thus preventing people from protecting it was an authoritarian contrivance.
It is not. The existence and enforcement of IP is an authoritarian contrivance by the government.
Hence the only valid course of action while we still live with the government that will enforce it is to say "you may do anything with this except impose any further restrictions on it or derivative works of it", so as to nullify anyones ability to use government aggression to restrict other peoples freedom to copy and share information. Even libertarians should support the GPL for this reason. It nullifies one area of government coercion.

Until they forge your signature. Get fucked. I don't support unlimited patent/trademark nonsense, but come up with better arguments.

You're fucking clueless. Patents were purportedly created to get people to disclose their inventions, in exchange for a temporary monopoly on its exploitation. The part they never tell you is that litigation is so fucking expensive only deep-pocketed corporations can afford to sue.
Also
And as if the patent system wasn't cancerous enough, you can refuse to license a patent no matter what, and you can also get sued for infringing a patent you did not fucking know existed. How retarded is that?

AFAIK, intellectual property costs us way more (billions of wasted tax payer money, only rich people can afford to sue, only inventions with big returns get funded, patent thickets, rent-seeking, patent trolls, copyfraud, trademark bullying, orphan works, stalled projects in limbo, chilling effects, tragedy of the anticommons, fair use is useless unless proven in court) than it brings to the table (monopoly on the exploitation of a name/invention/expression). The existence of Libgen and sci-hub is a great example of how flawed the system is.

Remind me of that design patent Apple got for curved edges on a device.

This is why no one takes intellectual property proponents seriously

Property is defined by whoever has enough guns willing to defend it. It doesn't matter that intellectual property is an unworkable clusterfuck, it still has people who support it and therefore it exists. Sure its technologically impossible to regulate, but since when does the law care about that?
intellectual property exists, its just not very efficient.

Thanks to those who turned out to defend IP. I almost feel sorry for you, but your position was indefensible, and you've been annihilated.
This is very rare on the internet, but we've actually reached a consensus.

lmao

huh really makes you think

fucking kill yourself you parasite

This is boofo the clown
Do not repost him

Literally all of this can be applied to proprietary software.

once more: Not an argument.
ALL Intellectual property is fake and enforcing it is authoritarian. Its not that it "can be abused," its fundementally incorrect and illegitimate.
Consider a comparison
What you're doing is equivilant to crying "WTF THIS IS SO AUTHORITARIAN THEY'RE TAKING AWAY MY FREEDOMS I CANT GO ANYWHERE AND HIT BLACK-HAIRED PEOPLE EVEN THOUGH ITS MY FREEDOM TO DO SO THE GOVERNMENT SAYS SO"
If intellectual property is fundementally incorrect, which it is, then enforcing it is the government taking away peoples natural freedom to share information, and this comparison is highly accurate.

Frankly, the proprietary autists tend to be much more professional, exude honesty, and are simply more competent in my opinion.

Well, compared to the Chinese in any case.

Is this b8?

If people like you had your way, we'd be sharing nuclear technology openly.

If you understood human nature, you would see why that's a bad thing.

You know the type.

The guy that complains to IT about security flaws and they never listen to him.

Scaremongering isn't an argument either.

Are you retarded?

How can it be scaremongering if half of you pray for nuclear war everyday?

How old are you, user?

Look at him fail to put words in my mouth.
Look at him and laugh.

Buzzword the post.

No really, come up with an actual argument, follow your own advice fellow shitposter.

Try to make it longer than a few lines this time.

I made mine. You never made any argument against it. You just started bringing up nonsequiter doomsday scenarios and insinuating I want them to happen.
ie, making baseless slippery slope fallacies and then attacking the character of the other person by presenting a straw man to beat down.
"IF YOU PEOPLE GOT YOUR WAY THEN [terible thing]" isn't an argument. Im not going to respond to it with one.
You're just here to shitpost though, arent you. Fuck off back to /g/, holy shit.

...

You're about to claim that this statement right here isn't shitposting.

Pls.

What a joke.

That still isn't an argument, you have the intelligence of a 5 year old God damn.

Still waiting for a real life example, oh wait, you can't come up with one and would rather post memes, k.

Im gonna say the burden of proving that a fucking idea, information, can be "your" "property", that you """own""", im gonna say that lies on you
Faggot.

It's not an argument, it's a statement discussing your hypocrisy.

Normally people would provide substantial burden of proof when making such a blanket statement like that.

Good thing I'm here to point out the obvious to you.

You still have some work to do before I take that statement seriously buddy.

You don't even know the difference between a patent and a non disclosure agreement. Not that you would be forced to tell everyone how your nuke works if it wasn't patented anyway. Where did you even get that idea?

How do you feel about trade secrets then?

Never mind that none of this really enforceable.

...

It is so fucking easy to greentext ideological superiority.

...

People deserving money for work isn't an inherent truth. Unless you have an agreement with someone where they'll pay you to fulfill a specific task, you're not entitled to anything. Try going to some random construction site and start pouring concrete for them. They're not going to pay you just because you worked.

There are plenty of ways to make money, notice how I didn't use the word "only".

Also notice how a criticism of the ability to enforce a law suddenly turns into "Laws are just guidelines XDDD"

We like to call people like you intellectually dishonest.

I think this is the best thread we've ever had wow

That was seriously the best analogy you could come up with?

There's different types of work in the world newfriend.

Don't compare the concept of concrete dumpers to the concept of "Columbus's egg."

Why do we need intellectual property again?

You didn't make it clear that you were criticising the ability to enforce the law, you made it look like you didn't believe laws needed to be followed to the t.

The concept of intellectual property is not new.

People genuinely attach an importance for being the first.

Here is a story from around the 1500s

You claim it isn't a right.

I claim it is a tradition.

Why should I, in good faith, abandon a tradition that rewards the best of us, and advances the creative and the intelligent to the status of the elite?

The fact that you keep responding to my points by making counter-points while insisting this isn't an argument is either hilarious or pathetic, I can't decide which.
But no matter how many tortuous examples you come up with the fact remains that you
And you don't think there's a contradiction because *meta-physical hand-waving*.
You don't have a cogent point of view. It's all bizarro subjective and conditional.

>signature

What does any of that Reddit-spaced drivel have to do with intellectual property? Patents don't make people less or more likely to know who the first person to do something was. If that's what you care about then wouldn't a better solution be for the state to keep a database of who invented what, but not restrict using those ideas in any way? It would actually allow them to leave a greater legacy than they would otherwise.

The people that invented this paragraph style of writing existed before the internet was made.

It is a travesty that you attribute it to Reddit.

Yet another example of what can go wrong without IP.

It does not matter who really made it or when, what matters is that there is a standard that exists and any deviation from this standard leads to humiliation, so conform or leave here and go to >>>/reddit/
pic related is how I see people like you

Boy, it sure is easy to "win" when you completely and totally ignore the entire content of the other guys post and summarize it as "crazy subjectivist nonsense lol"
I never said enforcing IP is legitimate. I said IP IS ENFORCED, and therefore using it to prevent the harm it itself does everywhere else is practical. Just like violence is bad and should not happen, but violence IS DONE, and its therfore better to use violence to defend yourself and others than to refuse to do so because violence is bad.

are you saying we should not re-establish the kingdom of Jerusalem?

Thank for not repost Boofo

I'm sure people love the Windows telemetry botnet, and the Photoshop cloud shit, and OSU! taking shots of your screen while you play, and the encrypted songs Spoitify leaves, and Denuvo's botnet, and the shady Warden shit WoW has, and GameGuard anti-cheat (literally a rootkit), and Valve's VAC doing shady shit in the background, and League of Legends monitoring your computer, etc.

What the fuck are you smoking? You are under no obligation to distribute software, whether proprietary or free; if a program's GPL or something it doesn't mean it will be hosted for free on the internet. Basically,

intellectual property isn't a license to make money. It's society forfeiting its right to copy/use an idea/invention/name/expression in hopes it will lead to the betterment of society (which it didn't). But you'd know this if you weren't a retard with the intelligence of a 5-year-old.

we don't. Full stop.

And this is supposed to be an argument against IP?

So you're just going to ignore every other sentence besides the first one then.

Yes.
IP, unlike violence, didnt exist for most of human history, and could easily be gotten rid of.

thats what this guy seems to do. avoid everything you said and then act superior.

ok but you aren't in favor of getting rid of it. You want to keep it and use it to prevent other people from using it.

Are you fucking thick
Where the hell does wanting to use it to prevent its use imply "Wanting to keep it around"
I dont fucking want to HAVE to use it to prevent its use in order to not have my freedoms taken by it. Almost every post explaining this has used a word like "while" or "if" in reference to the existence of IP laws. No, I dont hope violence never goes away because if there was no violence I couldnt defend myself. Defending yourself and others against violence does not imply you wish for more violence, copyleft doesnt imply you want IP to keep being protected.

The term "intellectual property" tries to clump three totally different things into one. Specify which of the three you want to talk about, and we'll discuss. 1) copyright law, 2) patent law, or 3) trademark law.

sucks to be you
The GPL cries out in pain as it strikes you.

what the fuck are you even implying
"the government enforces it therfore its correct and right and your mitigating its effects is actually taking away freedoms?" No.
Nice infuriatingly vague, impenetrable smugposting you get to pretend means anything you want after the fact you schizoid fuck.
Literally "STOPPING PEOPLE FROM TAKING AWAY OTHERS FREEDOM IS HYPOCRITICAL AND AUTHORITARIAN BECAUSE ITS MAKING SOMEONE NOT DO SOMETHING"

FOURTEEN FUCKING YEARS
THAT SOUNDS AT LEAST A LITTLE FUCKING REASONABLE DOESN'T IT?

"Intellectual property" breaks markets and ruins capitalism.

Free market resource production is supposed to tend toward a commodity equilibrium where everyone is putting rutabagas onto the market and competing on price results in efficient rutabaga pricing. Instead, you have twelve million different retards trying to sell Maxturbago Brand POWER RUTABAGA with Vitamin C and it just results in mass retardation and confusion.

Yeah user I'm the schizoid here. Maybe you and Stallman can overthrow my vast conspiracy of public domain and force freedom on the world.

IP isnt reality, retard.
Nor is anything I've said contradictory. You've yet to provide any actual argument as to why it is other than vague implications of the afformentioned "preventing others from restricting natural freedom is bad because its preventing someone from doing something and therfore authoritarian"
nor did I imply i'm infallible anywhere. at all. even a little. Although I see you're vaugely, impenetrably implying that because I'm arguing for stopping someone from doing something
, I must just be able to justify doing anything to anyone for any reason somehow or another.
But you couldnt actually say that or it'd be obvious you were full of shit, stuffing words in my mouth and completely ignoring what It even was I was talking about, people using the governments willingness to coerce and threaten people to take away their freedom to share information.

Hahahahahahaha, kinda like conform to the current patent laws or be laughed out of court.

Where the fuck do you think you are?

We're using the term 'intellectual property' because we mean ALL OF IT

It's a tumor which gives (((them))) a way to milk everything for hundred years. The definition of monopoly. Interesting that every few decades (((they))) extend them by another 20 years. Name one reason why copyright terms should last more than 25 years after creation, instead of 100 years AFTER the death of the author.

Then they should sell it.

What's the problem?

See pic related

seperating your unrelated thoughts onto different lines isn't reddit spacing you wannabe oldfag

not him, but its sometimes indistinguishable from, given how a large number of posters on this site really believe so, you literally suggesting its because of an ethnosupremacist conspiracy by the jewish to enslave and/or eradicate gentiles, which is the cause of all bad things in the world. so you look like a retard and its obnoxious, if they thought thats what you were getting at.

Seperating things
out onto seperate lines
looks like this, and not

like

this

with

whitespace

inbetween

Imageboard engines like vichan have shitty kerning and line spacing, le reddit spacing partially fixes the readability, but it looks atrocious on big paragraphs.
TL;DR on OP topic, does confidential communication and possession of information fall under term of intellectual property? Wouldn't that violate privacy if someone stated "there is no intellectual property, therefore i can read through your papers and emails you sent to your wife"

this. if you want more space between lines, configure your browser. dont force your reddit cancer on everyone else.

...

...

honestly i just lose my shit when people assert the existence of IP, so I can't really mock them.

and continued for software

>>>Holla Forums
Play it on hard mode, nigger. Holla Forums is cucked as fucked when it comes to this.

RPGs in general arent even real video games. you just go around pressing a bunch of buttons to solve "quests", and with some terrible controls and mechanics which make it take 100x longer than if the engine was that of UT99 or Quake 3

The point is to manage resources and pre-plan your actions, you stupid faggot. Kill yourself.

medical and a few tiny aspects of engineering are literally the only argument for IP to exist. other than that 99.99999999% of assertions of IP are invalid

no, kill _yourself_. i have other shit to do if i need to use my brain. at least that argument would be valid for a good RTS, but not any RPG I know of

No, it relies on copyright. IP is not a real thing. It's not property, and it conflates copyright, patent, and trademark law. This should be avoided. Do not use the term "IP".

Yeah, like focusing on breathing through your mouth, I guess.
Then you don't know many RPGs. Now go play your cowadooty, faggot.

look nigger, there are 2 issues here

1. RPGs that make you go have relationships with people and shit are retarded because it's literallly just press button 1 or 2 and see which one the devs decided causes which outcome. it's reducible to having a bunch of buttons in front of you and pressing them in different orders, except you have to virtually travel for hours (in a world that is usually shitty, uninspired, and boring) to press these buttons

2. things that require thought like puzzles in RPG are retarded because i dont want to play a puzzle game. i dont do puzzles or "challenges", im here because i want to shoot/stab people. if i wanted to do puzzles i'd just work on some of my work in real life which has real purpose instead of pretending to feel accomplished by solving some stupid puzzle in a video game. the only good RPG i know is S.T.A.L.K.E.R, because it avoids most of this crap and has proper mechanics for combat. while it unfortunately has a lot of travel, the dangers you run into, the atmosphere, and the art all make it decent enough to be tolerable. in contrast, in games like pokemon red, borderlands, far cry 2, or mass effect andromeda, you just run into the same pathetic poorly concienved chararacters every 30 seconds and fight them with the shitty battle mechanics the game has on your way to any location.

okay, which RPG is actually good?

lol meanwhile the genuine artists are poor fags living in a shack somewhere while you listen to free "meaningful" music on your $500 headphones.
kys cultural cancer

i have no idea what you're trying to say. i got my headphones by walking into a store and buying the first one i saw for $5. they have very good quality. naturally, good artists are all around the spectrum of wealth. i would maybe pay some of them if i had a way to do it, but usually i support artists by going to their concerts, but not a lot come to anywhere near me

...

basically, all the shows i've seen are those faggy artists who are behind record labels and already have plenty of wealth anyway. unforunately for the ones who actually do need money, it's impossible to securely send them money over the internet, (unless they post a bitcoin address, which they don't) so i have no way to support them other than by repping them. most of them are long gone or inactive anyway

what chinks do or don't do with information i publish doesn't affect me in any way

...

I can guarantee that a bunch of bands actually have done that being idealist idiots. Guess what. People who pirate don't come to shows either.

...

uhhh most people i know who pirate also go to shows. hell some even fly across half the world to see them. how do you even buy music? you can't buy it in person. all you can buy in person is the mainstream shit which is literaly pointless to pay money to. i imagine you have to install some cancerous windows or mac only software similar to Steam and then you have the music in some shitty format with DRM, and a huge portion goes to a bunch of middlemen instead of the artist (hence why I said they should provide a bitcoin address). I think bandcamp at least lets you download mp3s but i fucking hate that site and everyone who uses it (except Lolishit, who doesn't even sell his music AFAIK).

confirmed for bystander who is not even in engineering or any important academic position

wait what, are you saying there are bands who make no money but would have been able to gain a living off their music if people didn't pirate it? fucking lol

Yeah right. Music costs literally cents and you still pirate it. But I'm supposed to believe that the kind of scrooge mcduck who does that also flies half the world to see a band play.
And I equally doubt your moralfag stance on middlemen since you claim to have no problem with venue middlemen.

who needs money amirite

it would have costed over $100K to buy all the music i've listened to. that's not even practical. only a fool would pay up front for thousands of albums. you're going to end up throwing away 99.99999% anyway. i go through albums thoroughly to find those rare diamonds in the rough, so it wouldn't do any good to go through some free "album teaser" either. but most fools only pay for a few albums that some friend or journal said is good and never try anything else.

no im saying my pirate friends have travelled far to see music. the furthest i went for the sake of music was hundreds of KM but that's just because i was meeting a friend there. the fact that you're so skeptical about this makes it seem to me like you're out of touch.

like i said, most of the shows i've seen were pointless because they're all big popular artists. at least at a show you have proof the artist is probably getting paid since they're physically right in front of you.

sure it could happen, but it's rare that someone genuinely is interested in making artistic music and also depends on money from it. people definitely aren't entitled to make profit from art. we live in a corporate world where practically any product/service is only there for the sake of the creator (and his leeches) to profit. even if someone goes in as an artist, they quickly realize it's a lot of work to make something good, often impossible because they simply don't have time while also working a job, and usually give up and make something that's easy to make and it ends up sounding exactly the same as the last 5000 artists who did this. the lyrics, devices, song structures, arrangements, playing styles, are all exactly the same among all these artists in a single genre.

Let's see reasons why nobody makes or will ever make stuff for someone like you

think you're superior for exploiting others
hypercritical
hypocrite, consumer mindset
lack of empathy and consideration for others
selfish
childish self-justification of greed, they deserve it anyway mentality

That's all I needed to read, brainlet.

You don't need to pay to listen to music or buy everything you've ever listened to. If you like a band, and you want to hear more, it makes sense to support their effort. At least buy a ticket when they're in town and bring a recorder if you're against the middle man.

the autism is strong in this one

is too afraid to name one RPG because it will be made fun of