Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan
Laws aren't supposed to follow "what many people think is fair." "Many people" often don't know the full facts, and therefore can't make a "fair" judgment. So laws are created to be just.
|
What's the distinction?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dictionary.com
just [juhst]
adjective
1. guided by truth, reason, justice, and fairness: We hope to be just in our understanding of such difficult situations.
2. done or made according to principle; equitable; proper: a just reply.
3. based on right; rightful; lawful: a just claim.
4. in keeping with truth or fact; true; correct: a just analysis.
5. given or awarded rightly; deserved, as a sentence, punishment, or reward: a just penalty.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan
Yes... but this doesn't somehow give individuals rights to ignore copyright laws because it is personally inconvenient, and that is the case here (and, in truth, in most copyright arguments).
If laws are unjust, they should be changed. But claiming a law is unjust is not a good enough reason to just ignore or violate it at will.
|
Would you say the same to The Mother of the Freedom Movement?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks
Laws that are outrageously unjust are routinely ignored. Despite the high financial penalties imposed on speeders, the ticket itself, the extra money to attend traffic school, the traffic school fee, if you get another one the increase in your mandated car insurance for several
years, almost nobody follows the posted limits.
If you want to win this battle, you have to change the mindset of the consumers, and the best way to do that is without vitriol or woe-is-me rhetoric. It's with honesty and hard evidence.