[mazambazz]

Agreed completely, and you touch upon something very poignant.

Those living in poverty already fall short of fulfilling their hierarchy of needs in many ways. They certainly do not have the money to access film and media, so it's not like the production company is losing out on sales.

Do we really want to take the position of putting forth a monetary requirement for cultural enrichment (by condemning piracy)? It isn't like stealing someone's movie or concert ticket, where it deprives someone else of their enjoyment. It's a societal net-positive in all regards.

When it comes to mediums of knowledge such as books, the argument becomes even stronger. There are so many books that are either exorbitantly priced or just completely unavailable. We live in an age where we can send robots to other planets, create AIs that beat the Turing Test, and communicate with (almost) the entirety of the global population from a small rectangle in our pockets--but you're telling me I can't read this book because either I don't have $200 or because there's only 10 physical copies and they're all rented out? The hill that knowledge and information should be accessible to everyone is the hill I'm willing to die on.

[meiraleal]

Isn't it interesting how the advertising monetization model didn't take over movies the same way Google took over TV, newspapers, etc. with free services? Like how a movie could be full of advertisements like cars, restaurants, tech and then be distributed for free