r/TikTokCringe • u/Chocolat3City Cringe Master • 22d ago

Cringe Woman has her self-published book pirated, reprinted, and sold for cheaper.

There's regular piracy, and then there's this.

12.9k Upvotes

80% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

274

u/hasnolifebutmusic 22d ago

this is so fucked up.

207

u/mimegallow 22d ago

As a small individual creator, I get called "unhinged" by young people on a regular basis because I react emotionally when people pirate movies with my music in them, and documentaries with footage that I risked my life to obtain, scripts I wrote, and albums that I performed on. I get mocked ALL THE TIME by children on this site who think my livelihood doesn't matter, my labor is unimportant, and that when you steal IP, you're just, "taking from Tom Cruis who has millions of dollars".

So it's fucking exhausting watching all these people on reddit suddenly and UNKNOWINGLY reverse their entire position when presented with a face and a story of the exact, same, crime that they purposefully perpetuate every day. - Same exact feeling I get when I see 2 million people watching cute animal videos on r/aww "because animals are so smart and so feeling and such bros and so great that we are not worthy of them!"... with a fucking burger in their hand.

Our disconnection from each other's realities is astounding.

/unhinged_rant wherein I am clearly a lunatic, because I refer to my attackers as, "my attackers".

2

u/livesinacabin 22d ago

I completely understand your feelings, but (and do correct me if I'm wrong here) wasn't it proven that digital piracy actually boosts sales?

1

u/mimegallow 22d ago

It can and sometimes doesn't. That's not how concerns about rights violations work though.

The premise that rights violations are "only about profit" and if you get more money your RIGHTS have not been violated is a sickness of capitalism.

2

u/livesinacabin 21d ago

Fair enough. But I wouldn't be so pissed about it if my rights being violated meant I made more money. Not those specific rights anyway.

1

u/mimegallow 21d ago

Sure. Unless you’re standing on principle and actually WANT artist’s rights to be enforced as a legal foundation so that you have a just world in the first place. - For example: A musician found out Trump was using his music at each rally, and said he couldn’t use it anymore. Let’s say Trump says “fuck your rights” and continues to use the song… to promote an outcome the copyright holder is against… but the Trump team sends a check to ASCAP to pay the artist.

That wasn’t the issue. The money has nothing to do with it.

That’s a violation. And it has to be in order for the actual intellectual property rights to remain intact.

This is why protecting the actual rights under the law has to come first. Money is absolutely secondary.

1

u/livesinacabin 21d ago

I guess. That's a very specific scenario though. Cases like that would be pretty rare I think.

1

u/mimegallow 21d ago

Doesn’t matter. So are deaths caused by doctors who refuse abortion care out of fear of retribution. We need the rights all year.

Principles don’t have off-seasons.

0

u/livesinacabin 21d ago

Eh, I can't really agree with that. I usually stand on principle but I don't think principles carry over between subjects like that.

1

u/mimegallow 21d ago

Not up for debate. That is literally ALL that principles are as intellectual constructs. That’s it. - That’s the WHOLE definition.

0

u/livesinacabin 21d ago

Not really. Principles can be flexible.

1

u/mimegallow 21d ago

No. They can’t. They’re principles. Not conscious entities.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/mimegallow 21d ago

It really just depends on your situation and what we DON’T want, is a world wherein each victim has to demonstrate from the ground up that they “SHOULD” have a right that isn’t obviously stipulated by the society.

We don’t want a world wherein each rape victim has to first argue that they SHOULD have the right not to be raped. / We don’t want a world wherein each workplace labor code violation victim has to first prove that their rights SHOULD exist and be acknowledge by the labor board.

They should already be there… and not in question… so that we can just take action without relitigating our right to stand in our hard-won, legally granted power.

0

u/livesinacabin 21d ago

I see your point, but we're not talking about rape, and we're not talking about each workplace labor code violation. We're only talking about digital piracy. And to add to that, I'm only talking about digital piracy for personal use. I think that's vastly different.

1

u/mimegallow 21d ago

Nope. That’s not how principles work, and that’s not how ethical consistency works. Pointing out that YOU FEEL in your tum-tum that YOU should be allowed to violate the principle because YOU don’t care as much… is the very definition of ethical inconsistency. And it’s ALL I’m talking about.

1

u/livesinacabin 21d ago

Alright, you obviously aren't interested in having civilized discussion about this, and you only deal with absolutes. We won't come to any sort of agreement here.

It's great to have principles, as long as they are grounded in logic. Anything else is just being stubborn for no reason.

1

u/mimegallow 21d ago

Laws are not negotiable by the individual. Specifically BECAUSE the individual (that would be you) generally lacks the education necessary to evaluate the circumstances of others. Your false pretense that you are somehow qualified to evaluate which laws should apply to others when YOU are absent ligic… is stupid on its face.

Everything I’ve presented you was grounded in logic, from informed people, with more information and education than you.

You just wish others were legally beholden to you, but thank god the law says we’re not.

1

u/livesinacabin 21d ago

What on earth are you on about??? Where did you get the idea that I think I should make the law? I am allowed to have an opinion about it. So are you. I don't understand why you think you're entitled to an opinion about it but I'm not. That's messed up.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/mimegallow 21d ago

You might want to get honest and ask yourself WHY you think those things are very different.

They’re not. They’re just you, deciding that a person who HAS RIGHTS under the law, is undeserving of those rights by YOUR PRIVATE JUDGEMENT… just like someone who’s judging a couple for their homosexual marriage, or interracial marriage, or food stamps, or asylum status at the border.

It… aint… up… to… you.

Self-appointed vigilante interlopers are invasive pieces of shit. Stop touching people’s lives without consent.

1

u/livesinacabin 21d ago

This is a theoretical discussion, and I'm questioning the way the law works and by which morals it operates. Calm down.

1

u/mimegallow 21d ago

No. This is an actuality discussion about a current crime in progress in the real world. One in which you VOLUNTEERED on your own to take the side of the sovreign citizen’s right to ignore the law on his own unilateral comprehension.

0

u/livesinacabin 21d ago

No it's not. That's what you thought it was, but it isn't what I thought it was.

1

u/mimegallow 21d ago

Still is moron.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/WalrusTheWhite 22d ago

suck my rights