← Back to context

Comment by pyman

6 months ago

Someone on Twitter said: "Oh well, P2P mp3 downloads, although illegal, made contributions to the music industry"

That's not what's happening here. People weren't downloading music illegally and reselling it on Claude.ai. And while P2P networks led to some great tech, there's no solid proof they actually improved the music industry.

11 comments

pyman

Reply
Imustaskforhelp  6 months ago

I really feel as if Youtube is the best sort of convenience for music videos where most people watch ads whereas some people can use an ad blocker.

I use an adblocker and tbh I think so many people on HN are okay with ad blocking and not piracy when basically both just block the end user from earning money.

I kind of believe that if you really like a software, you really like something. Just ask them what their favourite charity is and donate their or join their patreon/a direct way to support them.

  • x187463  6 months ago

    And somehow actually paying for youtube which fully removes advertising and provides revenue to the service/creators is seen as an utterly absurd proposition by a staggering number of people.

    • akimbostrawman  6 months ago

      Maybe because they don't want to reward Google for continuously running Youtube into the ground while still being worse than the free alternatives. Not to mention that they already watering down permium with premium lite, I give it two tears before you need to get premium+ to not see ads.

      3 replies →

  • Workaccount2  6 months ago

    If you are someone who can think clearly, it's extremely obvious that the conversation around copyright, LLMs, piracy, and ad-blocking is

    "What serves me personally the best for any given situation" for 95% of people.

  • timeon  6 months ago

    I think that critique of this case is not about piracy in itself but how these companies are treated by courts vs. how individuals are treated.