[Strolls]

Originally Posted by Lady Fitzgerald

So if large numbers of people cheat on their income taxes, the laws shouold be changed to make it legal? If large numbers of people believe is descrimination of some kind, the civil rights laws should be changed to allow it? If large numbers of people speed in school zones, the laws should be changed to make it legal?

The rule of law requires the consent of the people, otherwise it's a tyranny.

So if everyone is cheating on their income taxes? Yes, it could well mean that those taxes are too complicated and allow too many loopholes. That's how lots of people get away with cheating the system, in actual fact today.

If enough people speed in school zones? Well, I don't believe that the majority of people would intentionally endanger schoolkids, so maybe we should examine if the school zones are clearly marked, or if they are too large or actually necessary where they're marked.

In a free country the will of the people is important - just because something makes perfect sense from one perspective doesn't mean it's inherently right. So when the majority of people engage in casual copyright infringement, then yes, I do think that a democracy needs to accept that the electorate doesn't actually agree with the law. I think this shows that the law needs re-examining.

We've already seen in the past what can happen when government grants an unjust monopoly: revolution!

I think it's disingenuous to compare copyright infringement to slavery or civil rights issues. No-one's forcing writers to write. Without copyright, art will still be created, as it has been in the past. We might equally compare intellectual property protection to welfare - what? Beyonce enjoys singing, so she shouldn't have to work for a living? You're going to argue that that's ridiculous - in the free market we're all happily paying for her CDs, but in fact this intellectual property with which we provide her is an artificial construction of government. The law is saying "you've bought that Beyonce CD, but, no, you can't do what you like with it; you can't make copies of a CD that you own".

Is that crazy? It's no more crazy than comparing copyright infringement to slavery, because you've set up an argument that lots of people once thought slavery was ok.

Intellectual property is not a natural right, the way freedom and the pursuit of happiness are natural rights; we have a natural right to expect not to be assaulted or physically interfered with in our daily business. Intellectual property is not like that that - it's far more complicated, and you do injustice to your arguments by claiming copyright infringement is "theft" or in any way so simple and clear cut. The problem cannot be solved so easily - in shouting down all disagreement with such a blind statement you show yourself unworthy of the debate.