I'm writing sci-fi book

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Ming


No... I totally understand what you keep saying.

You are saying that your mentality thinks it's OK to steal.

You may say crap like "disallows me to waste money on something that can be obtained for free"... But there is a big difference in something that is truely free... and something that you are stealing.

Again... you bring up the "well paid worker" or that you are poor stuff as an excuse... that some how, that makes it OK. It's still THEFT. And it is wrong. If you want to do it... fine... but no "I'm not a well paid worker" or my country is different excuses...

You have never said what you do is wrong. You have always walked around this simple issue by making excuses and rationalizations...

Just state you know it's wrong, and that you just don't care.

Stop being a hypocrit by defending your theft. Just admit what you are.

What if you don't believe that intellectual property rights are real rights? I don't: they are conventions that serve a certain purpose and it is no longer clear that they are serving that purpose in some sectors - in fact they seem to do the opposite sometimes.

[Ming]

Whether you believe in them or not, doesn't change the fact. It's theft, pure and simple. If you want to use the old "I don't believe in that law fine stuff"... that's just a rationalization... but doesn't change the fact that it is still theft.

[Solver]

Right, laws are laws whether you believe in them or not... but I dunno how can you fail to believe in intellectual property. Anything you've written or created is your intellectual property...

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Ming
Whether you believe in them or not, doesn't change the fact. It's theft, pure and simple. If you want to use the old "I don't believe in that law fine stuff"... that's just a rationalization... but doesn't change the fact that it is still theft.

So the law is what counts? I guess those runaway slaves were real criminals then? Or those cancer patients who smoke pot?

I suppose these people were just "rationalizing".

The law can and must change in certain circumstances. When copyright laws cease being useful in their present form they ought to be modified. If there is no possibility of the law being changed by democratic means (due to special interests, etc.) then some forms of civil disobedience are morally permissible.

[Solver]

There are, of course, cases when breaking the law is a very good job done from the humanity viewpoint.

Fact is, though, you have to obey by all laws, not just the ones you believe fair. I don't like driving limits, why can't I go at 250 km/h near kindergartens?

[DaShi]

I believe that you should be able to pick and choose which laws you will or will not obey. However, once you pick you are stuck with them, and there must be a set minimum number.

[Ming]

Well Agathon... so you are again using more straw dog arguments I see.

Theft is theft... you are stealing another mans property. How is that not a crime.

The examples you raise aren't relevent.

When copywrite laws cease being useful, they will determine other ways to compensate a person for his property, and change the laws... But copywrite laws are in place to protect against the theft of property...
Which is all we are really talking about here... not slavery

[Solver]

But copywrite laws are in place to protect against the theft of property...

Theoretically . Won't start working till someone actually enforces the laws.

[Ming]

The laws are enforced... but like in most crimes, not everybody that breaks the law gets caught

Again... the reason why people do it is because it's so easy... not because it's right or ok to do it.

If jou think its not wrong... just go into a music store and steal a cd... same thing. Oh, but that's right, you might actually get caught

[Solver]

What definition of enforced are you using? IMO, when noone breaking a law is caught, it can hardly be called enforcement. Dunno about America, here's how it goes in Latvia.

Our police, if coordinated with Economical Police, has the right to do raids for pirate soft at any official institution. That way, 75% official institutions (most state controlled ones) buy legal software, in fear of such raids. The rest 25%, which mainly are from educational sphere or small companies, don't. Such raids are extremely rare, but fine, they can happen.

Zero way to find someone using illegal software at home. Police can't break into my house and check it, they need a court order, and no court would give an order to break into house merely to check stuff like that. Besides, I would be forewarned of any order coming, probably, so would be able to do stuff .

The only chance of getting caught would be a police raid in a pirate CD shop. Still, if it's only financial police, the CDs will be confiscated and stuff, the shop will pay a fine for not paying taxes, but they'll be left alone to sell their CDs the next day .

[muxec]

Solver, if ruling party of your country will try to change it they will lose a lot of votes on next elections. It's real democracy.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Ming
Well Agathon... so you are again using more straw dog arguments I see.

No. I trust you know how inappropriate that label is in this case.

Theft is theft...

Why do people persist with these ridiculous tautologies? Wow.. a cat is a cat, sex is sex, what next?

you are stealing another mans property. How is that not a crime.

I did not claim that it was not a crime according to the law. What I claimed is that many things that are crimes according to the law should not be. Even the courts realise this, someone who speeds in his car in order to save a life does not usually receive a fine.

Those are the facts.

The examples you raise aren't relevent.

Of course they are. If you agree that slaves were right to run away, even though it was criminal to do so, you are endorsing the proposition that disobeying the law is morally justifiable in some cases.

That's all that example is meant to prove.

When copywrite laws cease being useful, they will determine other ways to compensate a person for his property,

Intellectual property is a legal construct. It doesn't represent any real moral relationship between a person and an idea or expression of an idea. IP laws were solely designed to ensure the production of good ideas by providing the legal basis for remuneration. That's how intellectual property came about - those are the facts - it is a strictly utilitarian concept.

Attempts to try and define some special relationship between a person and the product of his labour either fail because no satisfactory definition can be reached (like Locke's attempt to say it comes about by my mixing my labour with things) or falls into Marx's labour theory of value (which I'm sure you don't endorse.) Anything else is fairy stories.

and change the laws... But copywrite laws are in place to protect against the theft of property...

No they are not. Copyright laws are there to make sure that society benefits from the production of new ideas and expressions of them by providing an incentive for people to create them.

Ordinary property rights have a similar basis. We have property rights for utilitarian reasons. There is no moral relationship between a man and a piece of dirt or an idea. These things are legal fictions shored up by ridiculous natural rights metaphysics.

Which is all we are really talking about here... not slavery

Don't change the subject. The point of the slavery example is that sometimes the law is wrong. So it's an open question as to whether copyright laws are justified or not. You can't expect "it's illegal" to entail "it's wrong". If you do you are committing the fallacy of conflating legality with morality.

[Solver]

Solver, if ruling party of your country will try to change it they will lose a lot of votes on next elections. It's real democracy.

They're not concerned. The country does have issues far more urgent than high piracy rate.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Solver

Solver, if ruling party of your country will try to change it they will lose a lot of votes on next elections. It's real democracy.

They're not concerned. The country does have issues far more urgent than high piracy rate.

Well they should be. The current system is not yet broken, but it is breaking fast. There is a generation of young people who now don't expect to pay for music and movies - that means less music will be made.

The impediment is the media companies who simply have to accept that their old business model and they themselves are no longer economically feasible. Of course they will spend a fortune on politicians trying to buy draconian laws to stop people sharing files, but that will do more harm than good - particularly to legitimate methods of sharing information.

Look I'm not a major league pirate. I've downloaded a few songs, mostly ones I already paid for and own on cassettes. Sometimes I want to sample new stuff before I fork out for a CD. I bought three CDs last week for that very reason.

The record companies don't have many better friends than me, but they are seriously pissing me off with this draconian attempt to prevent people like me from enjoying music on their own terms (I'm sure they'd prefer it if I rented music over the web instead of owning CDs).

Here's the proof - this is about 1/3 of my collection (the rest are back in NZ - our flat isn't big enough for all of them):

[:) Smiley]

Theft is theft... you are stealing another man's property.

I believe it's wrong to steal another man's property. However, when it comes to stealing The Man's property...

You call it what you want.
I call it Economic Freedom Fighting.