Quote:
Originally Posted by JSWolf
if we left the links here knowing that they linked to a copyright violation or something else illegal, we'd be doing the same sort of thing as handing someone a loaded gun.
|
No.
It's like saying "
Jack Ruby shot a man" and tell me where he holds his gun.
And that's what newscasts do.
To make people think twice about what they
say, making them stay silent rather than risk a hard punishment, is exactly one of the targets of a Police State.
Actually, MR is giving enough information about that illegal site to make me easily google for it.
Is it really different from just giving the link?
I'd like to be free to
talk about crimes, as I'm free to talk about sports.
If I say here how to kill a man with bare hands, nobody here would think I'm exhorting you to be an assassin. And nobody will think about MR as a site where one can learn to kill people.
So why if I give you a link to a illegal site I'm treated like a criminal or an accomplice? (*)
To give news is not to infringe copyright.
To point out is not to upload.
To know where they are, is not to download them.
And if I download a illegal book, it's my fault. Not yours.
I agree 100% and more with restriction policies about books being posted here. And also about the prohibition to post software cracks.
And I also agree with the deletion to direct link to illegal files (that's not giving information: that's illegal distribution of copyrighted material).
But I don't like censorship in any form. And to say: "
John Doe is giving away books" is not to give away books. Not at all.
And, of course I understand it's not at all MR's fault. It's the law.
We can just respect it and try to change it democratically.
(*) you can find the answer, as usual, following the money.