Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
No. They're really not inconsistent at all. My main point is that lying--not white lies, not alternate facts, not mis-remembering what one said in the past, not changing ones mind, not breaking an agreement, but an honest-to-goodness "I'm-going-to-consciously-deceive-you-by-telling-you-a-straight-up-A=B-falsehood-so-I-can-get-my-hands-on-an-ebook" lie--is immoral. There's no wiggle-room in that whatsoever. There's no reason, excuse, or justification that can make that lie-for-trivial-gain NOT immoral. Now whether people (including me) care about the immorality involved is another thing entirely.
Tell me that you bypass geo-restrictions by lying about what country you reside in and you don't care if it's immoral or not, then I don't care. You're not trying to convince me that lying is OK.
Tell me you remove DRM and don't care if it's illegal or immoral (the breaking of a contract), then I have no beef.
But try to convince me that lying ISN'T immoral, or that you're somehow JUSTIFIED in removing DRM, or thwarting geo-restrictions, then I take issue. Because it's all morally shady. Own that (not targeting any specific individual here) and I'll shut up.
|
I "own" that thwarting geo-restrictions is morally shady. I also own that removing DRM is morally shady. I don't believe that *either* of these things are akin to piracy in any way shape or form. I'm not selling illegal copies of the books...I'm not even sharing copies of the books. I'm not obtaining copies of the books without paying for them.
In what way is thwarting geo-restrictions related to piracy?
Shari