This isn’t even like a personal opinion or a thought experiment. Pirating was huge, then Netflix popularized streaming and pirating went WAY down, and then the streaming experience went to shit and pirating went back up.

If there was a paid service that allowed me to download a file instead of having to buy a Blu-ray and rip it myself or be DRM attached to Amazon or something, I'd buy my movies for the higher quality than whatever odd torrent I find. The movie industry needs to do what steam has done. Make it more convenient to do it legally and people that have money will pay instead of stealing.

And have fun with regional licensing. Subittles only in German sorry. Audi only in German sorry. This title is only available in USA. This title is only available until midnight.

And you would still need to pay extra to watch the newest or older titles even if you subscribed to every service, and there are plenty of movies that just aren’t available regardless of which service you subscribe to.

It’s all enshittified.

He gets it. No wonder why I pay for every game I play, but I refuse to sign up to streaming services again.

If I can get better quality in almost every aspect for free, your service is really crappy.

I'm pretty sure it can be both. If there's AmazingService that allows streaming everything there is on torrent and then some, but it costs thousands of dollars per month, no one would be able to afford it and it won't have any meaningful impact on piracy.

Why can't it be both?

The problem I have with this is that there's no definition of what "owning" means. Never have individuals bought a game and then owned all rights associated with it. It was always a license that included personal use and nothing much else.

However, due to how media distribution worked, this license was generally valid forever and could be transferred to another party, and these two factors - especially the first one - make a good point: why would I enter such a license if the other side can factually nullify it at any point, while I lose that option after a certain time?

Apart from that, media piracy was never stealing in the first place. It's about unlicensed usage and distribution of media. And rightholders can't be surprised if people don't license it if the construct is so stacked to their disadvantage.

I rather take $120 and buy shittons of physical media with it. There's a fire sale on it everywhere right now because everyone is dumping it.

No. If I had money to spend on media, "affordable legal streaming services" would NOT stop me from pirating. Broad availability of DRMless media purchases would.

How about reading the article before commenting

heh. fr tho, I think this is more about the political climate in Norway than any sort of national identity. I doubt anyone in the states would openly admit to piracy, even if it was an anonymous survey. I think there's a psych term for that, but I forget it; has to do with fear of retribution when answering questions honestly.

"afford fewer and fewer things" needs correction: most "things" are being turned into "services" so people end up owning nothing and being forced to overpay for "service" they never asked for

Fair enough, half are still in the cradle or primary school. Maybe add it to the curriculum.

so you agree with half of half of young Norwegians

why not double half young Norwegian?

Yeah assuming young means below 16, you can't expect babies to know how to do online piracy, give them until they at least 10 or so

Edit it's 30 but my point still stands

Yeah my guess is the other half didn't have an opinion on the matter

ISIS run multiple pirate bay mirrors from their caves.

Are they, though? That number seems awfully low to me.