Case (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
case) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomsecrets2012-07-16 06:55 pm
case) wrote in fandomsecrets2012-07-16 06:55 pm
[ SECRET POST #2022 ]
⌈ Secret Post #2022 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.
__________________________________________________
02.
__________________________________________________
03.
__________________________________________________
04.
__________________________________________________
05.
__________________________________________________
06.
__________________________________________________
07.
__________________________________________________
08.
__________________________________________________
09.
__________________________________________________
10.
__________________________________________________
11.
__________________________________________________
12.
__________________________________________________
13.
__________________________________________________
14.
__________________________________________________
15.
__________________________________________________
16.
__________________________________________________
17.
__________________________________________________
18.
__________________________________________________
19.
__________________________________________________
20.
__________________________________________________
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 088 secrets from Secret Submission Post #289.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 2 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
no subject
stealing (vernacular)
1. piracy
2. tax evasion
3. ????
4. profit
Or something to that effect? Any documented source that states that "piracy" and "tax evasion" are "subcategories" of "stealing"? Any reliable source will do. Because if it's even remotely true I'm sure you could find one. I'm positive I could find one that was like:
duck
1. mallard
2. mandarin
3. other subcategories of duck
or
sports
1. swimming
2. running
3. you get the point
So, like, anything like that?
no subject
no subject
...I'll take that as a no, then.
no subject
no subject
word that encompasses all the "taking-things-that-aren't-yours" things we're saying is 'stealing'
There isn't one. That's what I've been saying the whole time. You've been making the case that "stealing" is synonymous with an ephemeral "property bad" that means literally anything to do with the attainment of, access to, or deceitful retention of property for personal use when required by contract to do otherwise. I'm making the case that "stealing" has a much, much narrower definition, and that we should call things that are not stealing by what they really are.
...Is that so terrible? Truly?
no subject
There is. It's called 'stealing.' Steal a glance, a kiss, an idea, credit, steal time, glory, a base, someone's heart, boyfriend or hairdresser, "stolen valor"... it's a widely-used word. That's why they use it in this argument as opposed to saying "downloading is larceny." And then all the argument is usually over whether downloading is victimless or truly the ephemeral property bad that is stealing.
no subject
And yet, you can't find a single source to back it up when it comes to this supposedly all-encompassing word that defines both piracy and tax evasion as "subcategories of stealing in the common parlance".
So no, I don't buy your argument. At all. Nor do, as I pointed out, many people. With zero evidence I don;t have to.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2012-07-17 07:54 am (UTC)(link)Everyone who uses the word stealing to mean taking something you shouldn't. Many people. It's such a common understanding of the word people tend to to explain it because it's like looking at the sky and going "it's commonly blue"
Here's a stupid fucking source for your ridiculous pedantic argument
http://youtu.be/HmZm8vNHBSU
I'm not sure if this is specific to my country's DVDs/videos/whatever. But the implication here is that people GET that the general term is stealing.
You are not allowed to download or rip this DVD. BECAUSE IT'S STEALING
no subject
This is the exact same video I used to prove your argument incorrect. You'll notice that the vast majority of the comments disagree with calling piracy stealing, resulting in the negative rating. The video-makers themselves know that the difference in intent and result between piracy and theft exists, which is why they say "you wouldn't steal a car" in the first place, because is the assumption is that while you likely wouldn't steal you likely would infringe on copyright. The core of the video is the acknowledgement that in the common perception, piracy =/= stealing. Were this not so, they would not have to make the video in the first place to enforce the notion. It is the case that so many people recognize that piracy =/= that they have to produce propaganda to try to convince them.
So yeah, you've demonstrated precisely the opposite.
You are not allowed to rip the DVD. BECAUSE IT'S COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. (Though the MPAA would really, really like if you'd conflate it with stealing, because it's easier for them to demonize pirates!)
no subject
Is a pretty popular meme in response to that statement.
no subject
Which proves the point, no? What they mean by "fuck you I would if I could" is that they would download a car - i.e. access a functional copy without the permission of, say, Toyota, while the original car sits in the dealership waiting for sale.
Whereas, if there's no difference between that and walking breaking into and making off with one in the parking lot, why wouldn't they do so? After all, they're the same! They're stealing!
The very fact that they would do one and not the other pretty much drives home the point that they aren't the same.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2012-07-17 06:12 am (UTC)(link)no subject