But piracy demand also indicates to companies an untapped market that they could tap if they create the right product

I agree with your conclusion of not watching it, but the reason that companies might observe and take a non-purchase as some kind of hypothetical market signal doesn't seem like the strongest argument for that, especially if people are avoiding the purchase specifically to deny them money for ethical reasons, that's not something they can resolve by making 'the right product'.

If pirating a Harry Potter show provides support to its author, I think that support is going to be more in the form of cultural relevance and mindshare than anything directly financial. Being a fan of an IP gives other people a reason to engage with it because your interest signals things to other people, like it means that by not watching it they might be left out of the loop etc, and since the law enforces property rights over what can be done with it and who can profit, that adds to the power of its owner by influencing the choices and interests of other people in their favor.

I'm just here to bring to your attention Lev Grossman's "The Magicians", both the books and the assorted TV show, which is quite awesome in its own right, even if it diverges from the books by quite a bit. There's a whole world of awesome outside of HP, and even if it wasn't, I refuse to recast in my theater of the mind the extremely talented and deeply regretted Alan Rickman and Dame Maggie Smith.

There is so much far better content out there to absorb other than Harry Potter. I can go without and be perfectly fine. I think we already have some of the books and DVDs from ages ago. So if my wife or I suddenly have the desire to revisit, we’re not consuming anything HBO or anyone else can even remotely trace.

I have a set of the books from the time of release. Strangely, I’ve never read the last one.

If you’re curious regarding the details, ContraPoints has a long form vid on the issue.

I wouldn't watch it anyways, I got tired of Harry Potter in the early 2000s.

i agree OP

fuck the haters and lowkey transphobes

Omg... About to go find out why I should stop reading Orson Scott Card...... Thanks a ton OP.

I'm barely aware it exists and almost never see anything about it.

Making a post called "Reminder: do not watch HBO's Harry Potter." Is literally marketing it and forcing people to think about it.

Agree 100%. I've been in some tough conversations with fellow LGBTQ+ allies over my participation, however minor, in the Harry Potter fandom. I'm seeing a lot of "it's fine if you liked it before we learned JKR was a bigot" but I'm also seeing a lot of people with the same story as mine — discovered the franchise back then, enjoyed it, but do not like what JKR is doing to the trans community — but also criticising me for the same. Like it's "fine" (to some extent?) if you're trans and JKR betrayed you, but if you're not trans, you're held to a higher standard as an ally. I dunno. It's confusing. I will not, however, back down from my claim that I enjoyed the first four (+HBP) books and the first four films before I learned she was crazy... and that this year I rewatched Philosopher's Stone in 4K (and yes, it holds up).

All that being said, the fears and concerns in the trans and LGBTQ+ community are valid. They may be jerks about it online, but as an ally, I can only ever strive to be a better one. I can't change what I liked in the past and I will not deny it, even to history revisers. But I can change what I do in the present, and I can always strive to Do Better.

I don't like the new Harry Potter series because of why it exists. JKR was disappointed the stars of the film series did not share her transphobic views, so she immediately made a point to recast Hermione and to make her completely different from Emma Watson's portrayal, as Watson was her most outspoken critic. She didn't make Hermione a Black girl to be inclusive, she did it to distance Watson from the character because Watson isn't transphobic. JKR further muddied the waters by saying that Dumbledore was gay and always had been (though no evidence of this is in the books — he's essentially treated as ace, as in, asexual, as in, his sexuality is undetermined and probably doesn't exist, which is fitting as the entirety of his character's relevance is mentorship to an adolescent boy). When the rest of the cast basically stood against her, she set out to recast all of them.

The new Harry Potter series looks like it might be fun, but I cannot in good conscience watch the new series. There are so many more things out there to see. Watching it with infinite time would be one thing, but I haven't got that, have I? I was fully grown when Philosopher's Stone came out, and I had no intention of seeing it. A coworker slipped me a bootleg copy (while it was still in cinemas!) and I watched it... twice. Then I went and saw it in cinema. I then collected the books and read them, and watched the movies, though I didn't like it after the fourth one. It stopped being fun. I'm currently reading Dungeon Crawler Carl, and by that I mean, of course, I'm listening to the audiobooks. I'm in the second to most current book, the seventh one, and it's still fun. It's gotten serious, but it's still fun. And, to the best of anyone's knowledge, Matt Dinniman (the author) and Jeff Hays (the audiobook narrator) are not bigots. That's the magical adventure series I'm looking forward to.

I feel like by this logic you shouldn't have even brought it up since they also track Internet engagement...

In any case, aside from JKR being a piece of shit who deserves zero support:

These remakes seem completely and utterly unnecessary and of questionable production quality anyway. Why rehash the classic movies that were actually decent adaptations of the source material? Is this one arc really the only story worth telling in that universe?

Boycott it because JKR is a Nazi. Don't watch it because it's yet more Hollywood remake slop.

At this point it's only a matter of principle. JKR is a billionaire, her activism isn't limited by money. And most HP fans don't care or even know about her hateful views, so anything they put out will still make her millions.

I doubt I'll watch it, still gonna download it and put on my media server regardless. Other people will want to watch it so it's better they watch it pirated on plex than on an official stream.

Never thought I'd see the day when hexbear users would make a ton more sense than anyone else on a given topic. But here we are.

Damn straight!

Even if I wanted to watch a worse version of the movies I already watched, no fucking support for transphobes!

IMHO the onlyy ethical way to consume new HP media is original fanfics featuring LGTB+ characters. 😆

It's shocking to me someone would want to watch this.

Harry Potter was never good. Why would someone even want to read a Harry Potter book obtained before 2020???

The TERF stuff didn't make Harry Potter bad. It always sucked, and people only realized after the TERF stuff.

As a compromise to not contribute to stat gathering could one not use newsgroups?

Meh, sail the seas and do what you want. This sounds like a plea from the corporate overlords to get you to not pirate their shit. Also, what show?

There’s a bunch of flaws in your logic here, not the least of which is:

There is no ethical Harry Potter consumption within capitalism.

Piracy isn’t capitalism

Edit: let me be more clear--

You're trying to resolve one ethical dilemma with another unresolved ethical dilemma: You're trying to resolve: "Can one appreciate an artist's work while acknowledging that the artist is detestable?" with the same logic as "Is digital piracy an ethical workaround to media capitalism?" and combine the two arguments into one solution: "Is it ethical to pirate Harry Potter media from HBO, even though I find both Rowling, HBO, and capitalism detestable?"

It's like asking, "As a strict environmentalist, is it ethical to drive my EV to the market if I know I had to charge it from an energy grid powered by coal plant (that I had no choice but to use)?" Because no matter how much personal opinion and moral relativism enters the ethical calculus, there's a logical breakdown at the crosspoint of systemics, when individual participation merges into participation at scale, how much your choice is actually a choice at all, how much your choice would make any difference, and on and on...

but before all of that, it doesn't make any logical sense to even go down that path since trying to resolve one ethical dilemma with another - especially expecting a black-and-white answer - is just a bit silly.

Boycotts for media work about as well as those for Hogwarts Legacy, not buying a Tesla post 2024, or staying off PSN after Sony announced game discs will no longer be made. Sadly most people don't care about the political views of those who make these things unless it personally affects them. The only successful boycott I've seen recently is Canadians avoiding American goods in supermarkets and even that took an existential threat of annexation for them to act on it.

You'd have an easier time herding cats.