If buying isn't owning, piracy isn't stealing (pluralistic.net)

Article summary

The article discusses how companies like HP and Adobe design products with remote, irreversible, nonconsensual downgrade features, which can lead to users losing access to paid content or features. This is compared to piracy, with the argument that if buying doesn't guarantee ownership, then piracy isn't stealing. The article cites examples of companies removing features or access to content after purchase, and argues that this is a result of designing devices for remote control and non-consensual changes. The author suggests that this is a foreseeable consequence of allowing companies to design products in this way.

Main themes

• Digital ownership and control
• Corporate power and accountability
• Free and open software
• Intellectual property and licensing
• Government regulation and intervention
• Decentralization and community ownership

What commenters say

• Some argue that banning non-free software would be a drastic and unworkable measure that could have unintended consequences, such as limiting access to technology for some users.
• Others propose that the solution lies in changing laws to protect users' rights and prevent companies from removing features or access to content after purchase.
• There is a suggestion that making managers personally responsible for the actions of their companies could help to prevent these kinds of practices.
• Some commenters argue that the problem lies in the concept of licensing digital content, rather than truly buying it, and that this needs to be changed.
• A few commenters propose that governments should mandate the use of libre software and open file formats to promote transparency and user control.
• Others argue that the focus should be on promoting the use of free software and open standards, rather than relying on government intervention.
• Some commenters note that piracy is still a real issue in the physical world, and that the term has been co-opted to describe copyright infringement in the digital realm.
• There is disagreement over whether it is possible or desirable to create a system where digital content is truly owned by the user, rather than just licensed.
• A few commenters suggest that the solution lies in creating alternative systems, such as decentralized networks or community-owned platforms, that are more resistant to corporate control.