[medavidson]

Since I'm the one who brought this whole mess out in the open, I feel obligated to respond to this posting.

Originally Posted by alex_d

You mean wrong like kicking a puppy is just wrong? and how cheating on your wife is just wrong? Morality is a tricky thing, but many people, you included, have a tendency to think that if someone wrote it down on paper, then it must be just wrong. You're the kind of guy who tell kids they're not playing their boardgame by the rules.

This has nothing to do with morality. As I said before, my intention is to prevent MobileRead from getting their pants sued off. I thought long and hard before I wrote that message and before I wrote to you personally. Kicking a puppy or cheating on your wife are also wrong, but they don't get you sued by a software company.

Originally Posted by alex_d

My sense of morality understands that laws are imperfect. You can't write a legislation that says, for example, "well, if a guy honestly didn't know he was breaking the law then you let him off." It's logistics, practicalities. You don't know who's lying. So you write a law that says, "professed ignorance is always ignored" and send everyone to jail. There's many other such examples too. It's understandable. But only an idiot thinks it's Right or ideal.

Again, this has nothing to do with morality, Alex.

Originally Posted by alex_d

So, if you are lawyer representing pdf-tools.com, or a judge, then I could see why you insist on sticking to the letter. But if you're just a guy, then you have a really misplaced sense of morality in thinking that actions which definately (not just sort of) don't hurt anyone are nevertheless Wrong in the ethical sense. You're just not thinking clearly.

Actually, you are quite incorrect here. I may be "just a guy," but I am also a person who develops software for a living and for a hobby. I wouldn't want to see my company's work distributed for free just because someone didn't want to pay for it. If it's open-source, that's a different story. The problem with your argument is that you are saying "the end justifies the means".

Originally Posted by alex_d

p.s. for those who'd like the background: rasterfarian makes use of pdinfo.exe to read the bookmarks in a pdf. It is the only commandline tool that i've found after extensive searching that does this simple task. pdinfo.exe is one of about a dozen executables that are packaged as a single product by pdf-tools.com called "command-line tools." This simple package retails for $360 per user, obviously targeted at businesses who could try to justify something like this (and the high cost arises not from how difficult it is to create the product but rather the dynamics of how much businesses would pay).

Actually, the version of RasterFarian I saw uses pdcat.exe (from pdf-tools) and xcopy.exe (from Windows itself). You can argue all day that $360 for 12 tools is too much and that it's not worth it for you to invest the time to write an equivalent tool when pdf-tools is really charging only $30 (360/12) for this... but that won't wash. It was obviously worth it to them to invest the time.

Originally Posted by alex_d

Now I'm not going to criticize how pdf-tools would like to make money, or our as-yet imperfect capitalism for not being empowered by fluid competition so that the price of things becomes their cost. That doesn't matter right now. Rather, it's pretty obvious that redistributing this tiny subset of a product that is targeted at a completely different market has caused pdf-tools.com no damages (and I say that with precision). On the flipside, this redistribution has considerably enhanced the RasterFarian tool that was created and is distributed for free for no reason other than to aid others.

Wow... ok, there is so much wrong with that paragraph... dude, that is NOT your decision to make. You can't say "I'm using this tool in a completely different market, and I'm not hurting pdf-tools by doing this" as a justification. Again, you are saying "the ends justify the means".

Originally Posted by alex_d

If the golden rule of morality is that "the Right is that which increases the sum of the Good in the world relative to its Ills," then pretty clearly what i've done here is good. The fact that the law can't be written to be so nuanced is understandable. Yet people who think that what's been written down is infallible, are not.

This is what I mean when I say your morality is misplaced.

This isn't a "good" vs "bad" argument. What you did could get MobileRead into trouble, and I've found this place to be a wonderful source of information. I took the initial step of writing to you so that I could get some clarification on this. You responded with a less-than-pleasant message basically telling me to go to hell.

Originally Posted by alex_d

Now that your actions have caused RasterFarian to no longer be offered for download, you have clearly done a significant number of people harm. What you've done is, obviously, legal. But was it ethical?

Compare what I've done to having MobileRead being shut down by a lawsuit because of YOUR actions. Now tell me I've done more harm than you.

Originally Posted by alex_d

Unfortunately, it is also in my legal power to forbid you from using RasterFarian. Do I consider this ethical? Certainly not. It is an empty, unfair act meant to hurt. It's also silly that I've been given the power to boss you around in this way. But it's legal. Now I wonder, would you obey or be a hypocrite?

And you miss the point... I have no intention of using your tool when it's got software you aren't licensed to distribute embedded in it. And you have every right to tell me not to use your software. The fact that you are responding in this way shows that you don't give a crap about doing the right thing. You just want to show everyone how moral you are. Good for you.

Mark