Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe
I think I was pretty clear about not talking about what hold legally. I am talking about ethical behavior and comparing the different variants of taking something from somebody else.
If I release software under a license that forbids commercial use then it is unethical to take this software and sell it even if the license was not valid so that I had no legal protection.
So taking the book and making an electonic copy and release it againts the authors will seems to me to be equally bad to the author taking the electronic copy against the maker of the copies will. In both cases a persons wishes is not respected.
|
This is an instance where the legal outcome and the ethical outcome are the same, because the law defers to the ethics of the situation. In both situations, the basic question is whether a person who has violated an ethical duty ("don't make copies") can assert an ethical claim ("you owe me for the work I did making the copies") against the person he has wronged. The answer is framed in terms of the copier not having "clean hands." Since the copier does not have clean hands, he cannot impose an ethical obligation on the author whose rights he has violated.
View it from another angle. Suppose someone steals my car. It's dirty & filled with ancient McDonald's wrappers. So he goes to the car detailer & buys the super fantastic detailing job. Two hundred bucks. A minute after the thief pays for the detailing, I show up with the cops, the thief is arrested, and I drive off. In my sparkling detailed car.
Do you think for a minute that I owe the thief $200?