I'm basically as ethical as pirates without being one.
I'm basically as ethical as pirates without being one.
The deal was completed, and because that damaged Xbox belongs to someone else, they can repair it. The company doesn’t have the right to resell it. Piracy occurs only when you create something that isn’t yours; a broken console remains yours and you’re allowed to fix it. A copy of your own property stays yours even after repairs.
But nothing truly belongs to me. Everything exists in black and white, only what’s licensed is yours—meaning copyrighted music or software means I’m not the owner legally, so I’m protected from any consequences based on that. Going further, taking it from someone requires effort and expense. You notice now the gap and the limits they can’t cross, because it hurts both sides.
Here you are removed from reality. The business seeks profit, this is common. We are moving into a time when reselling games and traditional products is considered theft. Platforms like PS Store, Microsoft Store, Steam, Origin, U-Play... all aim to eliminate the used market.
You might find it quite harsh to criticize me this way. Just because a business wants others to think otherwise doesn't mean they truly feel that way. I believe most folks would agree that once someone buys a product, they don’t owe anything to the company if it breaks and needs repairing—so reselling an item isn’t the same as stealing. Piracy involves taking something without permission, but moving a used item is simply changing ownership. Everyone has the same items, so nothing is genuinely lost or stolen. I’m not sure you’re suggesting theft or that all used sales are wrong, but one is straightforward piracy while the other seems a bit misguided.
This statement highlights that the publisher doesn't maintain authority over the content.
It revolves around stealing through piracy. The core idea is important, and from there, the second-hand market becomes essentially theft by companies since they lose money when buyers abandon their purchases and sell them for profit elsewhere. Companies act selfishly; if they could, they’d give it to us directly with a simple solution. This entire online space marks the start of eroding our freedom in that regard.
In discussions about used hardware and media, companies didn’t restrict who accessed these items by removing ownership of secondhand goods. Such control is rarely seen in other contexts. I disagree with the idea that selling a used item equals theft. When you buy something, you become its owner; giving it away doesn’t mean the maker was robbed. Ownership remains intact, and theft requires taking something without permission.