Quote:
Originally Posted by Catlady
Do you see a difference between (1) copying an LP and retaining a digital copy for personal use, then donating or selling the LP and (2) copying and retaining an LP and distributing multiple digital copies of it? Are both equally "bad"?
|
One is theft of a single copy, one is theft of multiple copies. The second is worse, simply in terms of scale. It is more wrong to rob two banks than to rob one bank. etc.
Quote:
|
Even if the buyer knows, or reasonably suspects, that the seller has retained a copy in digital form?
|
If you can be reasonably sure that you are buying stolen goods, I believe it is illegal to do so.
Quote:
|
Does it make a difference, ethically, if the original is donated instead of sold?
|
Does it make a difference if I rob a bank for my own desire for wealth, or because I want to donate the proceeds of my theft to charity?
Quote:
|
Must all originals be destroyed when one format shifts, if retaining them is impossible? Does that really make sense? Seems to me that it's not a good thing to advocate destroying cultural artifacts--that wholesale destruction is worse than some very slight harm to the copyright holders.
|
Oh, so now copyright theft is legally permissible if it is done for the sake of culture?
If you do not wish to retain the physical copies, you are being careless about cultural treasures. That is your prerogative.
You are under no obligation to destroy your possessions. You are however under an obligation to not perform theft with the excuse of doing it for the sake of culture.