Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
You are "justified" to make a copy from the material you own, for yourself, in another format. You are not "justified" to take someone else's copy, any more than you are justified to walk into a bookstore and steal a paperback because you already own the hardback. You are also not "justified" to take your copy and give it to others without compensating the original creator/publisher (which, based on your comments, I suppose we can assume you do).
Just because it's easy, doesn't make it right, or "justified." What part of this isn't sinking in?
|
OK, I'm interested in where you think the "justified" line is drawn. I'm going to put up a series of scenarios. Please tell me which ones you think are morally justified. I'll use CDs instead of books, because that's easier. (But please tell me if you think there's a difference between CDs and books in this sense).
1) A person buys a CD, and then buys the DRMed digital version of the album on iTunes in addition.
2) A person buys a CD, and then buys the non-DRMed digital version of the album on Amazon.
3) A person buys a CD, then rips the CD to MP3s for their own personal use.
4) A person buys a CD, then gives the CD to a company which provides them with MP3 files from the disc.
5) A person buys a disc from a company, which forwards their details to another company, which has MP3 files of every CD available. The person downloads the files separately, for free.
6) A person buys a disc from a company, scans in the barcode for verification, then downloads the MP3s from an unaffiliated company.
7) A person buys a CD from a company, then goes online to download the MP3s from an unaffiliated site.