Which isn't a very strong argument, since you also lose a potential sale if someone decides to purchase your competitor's product rather than your own. And hopefully no one would call that "stealing."
Except in this example, there is no competitor making the sale because of a lower price or higher quality product. The choice of product remains the same; the only difference is that the copier pays nothing to ANYONE and is the only person receiving a benefit.
I used to be in the camp in philosophical support of piracy, and I still pirate some of my media. But, I no longer try to excuse the behavior behind a thinly veiled philosophy.
Maybe it's not stealing, but it sure isn't harmless.
> Except in this example, there is no competitor making the sale because of a lower price or higher quality product. The choice of product remains the same; the only difference is that the copier pays nothing to ANYONE and is the only person receiving a benefit.
That's true, but the firm's bottom line is the same regardless of whether they lost a sale to piracy or lost a sale to a competitor.
> I used to be in the camp in philosophical support of piracy, and I still pirate some of my media. But, I no longer try to excuse the behavior behind a thinly veiled philosophy.
Then either I'm on the same philosophical road as you but further back, or my philosophical support is stronger than yours was.
>That's true, but the firm's bottom line is the same regardless of whether they lost a sale to piracy or lost a sale to a competitor.
Yes, the firm's bottom line remains the same. But the difference between losing a sale to a competitor and losing a sale to piracy has vastly different consequences. When losing a sale to a competitor, there is competition and money continues to flow into "Product Market X", fueling competition and innovation. When a potential purchaser in "Product Market X" gets the best firm's product for free, it hurts competition and innovation by decreasing the sale to the best company.
>Then either I'm on the same philosophical road as you but further back, or my philosophical support is stronger than yours was.
Only time will tell. I totally agree information should be shared and spread for the good of humanity, but there needs to be some returns for people that seek it (to a reasonable amount of money... Adobe can get bent).
Which isn't a very strong argument, since you also lose a potential sale if someone decides to purchase your competitor's product rather than your own. And hopefully no one would call that "stealing."