Quote:
Originally Posted by pilotbob
None of this justifies violating the copyright. It is the same as xeroxing a book in the library. You can't do it because it is a copyright violation. You don't have the RIGHT or permissions to copyright it.
I'm not sure if you are saying that the above is ok, or just playing devils advocate, but I would say I wholeheartedly disagree with you.
|
Indeed, this is a violation. And, for the sake of saying so in a fun way, the thing dividing what
can be done and what's against the law isn't a line. And whatever it is, unless you believe that the law is the absolute decider of your morality, whatever that dividing element is, it's not the same as what
should be done and what's against the law.
I'd suggest that a reëvaluation of copyright would be beneficial as the nature of copyrightable data is changing with new technology. If we agree that "rights" are fundamentally arbitrary things, then "wrongs" are, as well. I would extend, also, that in a democratic society, these things are necessarily open to debate and re-design. Creative Commons is taking that up in an exciting way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pilotbob
What if while you were on vacation I came into your house and stayed there for the two weeks you were gone. I slept in your bed... watched your cable, used your phone, your toilet, your shower, etc? Since it didn't cost you anything... no money was taken from your bank account because you still had to pay your mortgage, phone bill, water bill, etc even if I wasn't then there is nothing wrong with this, right?
BOb
|
If you left no trace and inconvenienced me not at all (you had no impact on my mortgage and bills, house layout, etc.), then why on earth would I take it out on you if I was paying those bills but you weren't? It might motivate me to find ways to get around paying those bills (perhaps by magically using someone else's house the way you did with mine), but my argument wouldn't be with
you.
- Danny