Post by @ewjoachim@piaille.fr

2026-09-12 06:03 UTC

@chaoddity@mastodon.social @ScottEdelman@wandering.shop the more people crave for Harry Potter content, the more lucrative the license will be. The more people watch, the more they’ll be attracted to it. There is a galaxy of people out there that don’t really care for Harry Potter, and will be quite happy to ignore the thing completely, but can be made curious if people around them talk about it a lot, so Inm not sure « sharing everywhere » is the best strategy. Is the risk of getting new people hyped larger than the risk of already hyped people buying the thing instead of torrenting it ? Not sur it’s clear cut.

Replies (1)

@toolbear@tech.lgbt 2026-09-13 00:46

@ewjoachim@piaille.fr "I'll just pirate it" in the case of JKR is a way of culpability-washing one's consumption of problematic media. It isn't about harm reduction. It certainly isn't about solidarity against fascists, it's the opposite of that. It's scab behavior. It's "watch all the problematic stuff you want with this one weird trick" wishcasting. Consuming Harry Potter whether paid for in money still pays Rowling. It absolutely grows the market. It keeps her relevant. It normalizes her and her work and her terrible ideas. And frankly, I don't believe most folks who say they didn't pay for it. They're lying to try and dodge judgement and shaming. "I hand out pirated photocopies of Mein Kampf…I'm virtuous, actually." It's shameful to not take one of the most obvious moral stands available to us today. It doesn't get more black and white than this. The ethics around JKR and HP specifically are clear cut in the present day. @chaoddity@mastodon.social @ScottEdelman@wandering.shop

Open ##5400196