Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuna
Ah, yes of course, you're not a freeloader, you're sticking it to the man!
You used the 'theft causes deprivation' definition. Well, let's see - you could have bought a book. The money you spent supports the publisher, editor, proof reader, typesetter, cover artist, distributor and of course the author. You might object to the distribution of your money, but it remains a fact that all of these people played a part in getting the book to you.
Instead you chose to steal a book. To take it without paying. Your defence is that you wouldn't be buying that book anyway because of the regional restrictions. So by your logic, no-one has lost any money. Except you could have bought another book to read - a physical copy of the book you wanted, or another book on your 'to-read' list. So, someone has lost out, because you've chosen to take your entertainment for free.
|
I think any person that doesn't buy at least one product every single day despite having the money for it should be summarily executed.
That saves the need of trying to omnisciently ascertain whether or not they "would have" bought it, had they not in their gravest moral bankruptcy chosen to do otherwise.
If you didn't buy today, I say: "Could've, would've, should've... but you ain't gonna no more. BAM! You
were the weakest link!"
- Ahi