Quote:
Originally Posted by HansTWN
Why do so many approach the issue from the angle "was the copyright holder really hurt?"
|
I'm mystified by it. Consider that with the most common everyday offences committed by average people in Western countries -- parking and moving violations -- it's so rare that anyone is hurt, and yet there seem to be widespread acceptance of those laws.
Another mystery to me is the argument that the pirates also buy more books than the average person. What about subway turnstile jumpers in the New York subway system? Isn't it probably that they use the subway system legally more than most people? What kind of defense is it to say that there were other times you paid?
A third defense is that you wouldn't have paid for the book anyway, but rather gone without. This is like the turnstile jumper saying he would have otherwise walked to where he was going. Quite possible, even probable. So what?
And what if the NYPD gives a news conference and says that they are losing X dollars a year on turnstile jumping based on the assumption that all jumpers would otherwise have paid the fare. Of course it is putting an exaggerated spin on the offence. But that's normal victim behavior, nothing anyone people remark about in a non-piracy context.
I don't want to see long prison sentences for victimless crimes like these. You shouldn't give any prison sentences for them, just fines or maybe, for repeat offences, probation. But you shouldn't defend the behavior.