Respectfully, that's a fantastic set of "rules" which will justify unconditional piracy, since no studios of any size will offer anything but a license to watch their content. That's how the market has been built.
I disagree. People said the same about music, and now you can buy DRM free mp3 and flac downloads because of previous pirating pressure. Most piracy is a symptom of bad services.
Just because you're buying an unencumbered MP3 or flac file doesn't mean you're free to do whatever you want with it. You're still licensed for just you and you can't make copies to send to all your friends (how enforceable that is is something that's above my head).
I'd say that most modern media piracy is still a matter of cost and convenience. If you're the kind of person that watches a couple of movies a week, at $20 a pop the cost adds up fast. Plus you have to go to the store or order online and wait for a DVD to show up. With piracy you can watch right away. It's one of the reasons Netflix was such a game-changer.
Somehow along the way a lot of people got it into their heads that all entertainment (and also news and educational materials. Basically, anything that doesn't have a physical form) should be free (free as in beer and free as in freedom) and they'll go through some impressive mental contortions to rationalize their piracy any way they can.
"An unjust law is no law at all...has become a standard legal maxim around the world."[1]
"Thomas Aquinas [argued] ... a law only need to be obeyed if it is [among other things] ... for the common good."[1]
The question we have to ask is: Is current copyright law unjust?
Well, it allows telling people that they are buying something (in large print, even if the fine print says something else) then taking that thing away.
And copyright on digital goods allows unprecedented control over how tools are used, when and where content can be shown, and how things that we've paid for can be retained and resold.
And it is also clear that recent copyright laws were written for the benefit of a few corporations, not for the common good.
So I'm beginning to believe that current copyright law is unjust and should be disobeyed as a principled form of civil disobedience, not merely for convenience or to save money.
> Respectfully, that's a fantastic set of "rules" which will justify unconditional piracy, since no studios of any size will offer anything but a license to watch their content. That's how the market has been built.
That's clearly not true, since starting from the 70s up until fairly recently one could always buy the movies to keep for life.
> Even DVDs will fail this test.
You'll have to explain that thinking, since they don't. I buy a DVD (which is the only way I buy movies) and it's mine to keep forever. If I get tired of it, I can resell it to someone else.
Maybe in theory. In practice, I disagree. Care to elaborate if you mean anything other than what's technically said on the box? Even the most recent DVD releases work on the oldest of DVD players without any firmware updates/online drm that could revoke a license or something.
Even DVDs will fail this test.