Confessions of a Book Pirate

[llreader]

Originally Posted by pietvo

No, I'm not confusing morals and laws. But what other moral issues are there regarding copyright? There used to be a time when there were no copyrights. You could just copy a book and it was considered right to do so. Copyright is something that is defined by law, not by morals. So I do make that distinction certainly. On the other hand I also feel morally obliged to conform to the law. Well, in fact, I go a bit further - I will not download illegal copies of ebooks although the law in my country allows it.

It is a little confusing - I think kennyc (sp?) believes that there are absolute moral property rights to ideas, but I could be misrepresenting his position.

Kennyc, can you restate your position? Do you still think that copying is theft and that it is a moral absolute (despite the fact that it was only recently in human history that this concept has come to exist)? I don't want to over-state your position.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by pietvo

No, I'm not confusing morals and laws. But what other moral issues are there regarding copyright? There used to be a time when there were no copyrights. You could just copy a book and it was considered right to do so. Copyright is something that is defined by law, not by morals. So I do make that distinction certainly. On the other hand I also feel morally obliged to conform to the law. Well, in fact, I go a bit further - I will not download illegal copies of ebooks although the law in my country allows it.

All I'm saying is morals and laws are different. Morals are doing what is right in society and towards others (in this case authors and their representatives in particular).

Laws are attempts to codify what governments (influenced by people, business, corporations) and perhaps society believes are absolutes.

Simply because you can do something or it is not illegal does not make it the right thing to do.

And no I don't believe in absolute morals, but I do believe in treating others as you would expect to be treated within the context of society and doing the right things for others, for society and for posterity -- in that order.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by llreader

It is a little confusing - I think kennyc (sp?) believes that there are absolute moral property rights to ideas, but I could be misrepresenting his position.

Kennyc, can you restate your position? Do you still think that copying is theft and that it is a moral absolute (despite the fact that it was only recently in human history that this concept has come to exist)? I don't want to over-state your position.

Yes copying my property is theft if it is done without my permission. The ideas I create and instantiate are my property, it is my right to share or not just as I would with land I own or physical products of that land.

[llreader]

Hmm, that is pretty vague. So, in this world view Homer would not be a thief because it was common and acceptable (even considered a compliment) to copy the works of others entirely in his time, but today copying is theft because... well, I guess saying that there is a big media campaign financed by corporations that have an interest in making money off media is slanting things a bit. Today copying is theft because why, exactly?

Is all copying theft? Is repeating large parts of Monty Python dialog theft if you don't make money off of it? What if you are using it to impress a girl (good luck) or a potential employer (ditto)? Or in a High School drama activity that charges admission? Or a fundraiser for the local library? YouTube? As part of a comic sketch that is how you make your living?

You don't have to actually answer all those questions, just something to think about. I don't really know when you consider copying to be theft, if you don't consider law to be a valid reference point. As far as those examples above, I imagine if you asked 10 people you would get a half-dozen different answers, at least.

And if you asked what are "the right things for others, for society and for posterity -- in that order.", you are certainly going to get people who honestly believe in things that you find abhorrent.

[llreader]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Yes copying my property is theft if it is done without my permission. The ideas I create and instantiate are my property, it is my right to share or not just as I would with land I own or physical products of that land.

It would be interesting to know by what moral doctrine your ideas are your property.

Some questions: If you use an idea in your "property" (say a story) that originated elsewhere (say, the idea of "gray goo", or teleportation), is it still your property? Can I use teleportation, and does that idea then become my property? How specifically "yours" does an idea have to be (from a moral perspective, there is legal precedent for this, actually)?

[stustaff]

Originally Posted by pietvo

No, I'm not confusing morals and laws. But what other moral issues are there regarding copyright? There used to be a time when there were no copyrights. You could just copy a book and it was considered right to do so. Copyright is something that is defined by law, not by morals. So I do make that distinction certainly. On the other hand I also feel morally obliged to conform to the law. Well, in fact, I go a bit further - I will not download illegal copies of ebooks although the law in my country allows it.

How are they illegal copies if its legal in your country?

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by pietvo

But what other moral issues are there regarding copyright? There used to be a time when there were no copyrights.

Now you are going back to a time when the only way that a normal person, who didn't own a printing press, could copy a book was by writing the text by hand. If you do that with your ebook today and distribute it to a couple of friends I am sure nobody will object

[llreader]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Now you are going back to a time when the only way that a normal person, who didn't own a printing press, could copy a book was by writing the text by hand. If you do that with your ebook today and distribute it to a couple of friends I am sure nobody will object

Minor point - the printing press predates copyright by quite some time.

In general, though, things have changed a bit, and copyright should reflect some sort of societal consensus about how it is implemented.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by llreader

Minor point - the printing press predates copyright by quite some time.

In general, though, things have changed a bit, and copyright should reflect some sort of societal consensus about how it is implemented.

As ebooks and digital property predate the current upcoming changes.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by kennyc

And no I don't believe in absolute morals, but I do believe in treating others as you would expect to be treated within the context of society and doing the right things for others, for society and for posterity -- in that order.

Strange, you said on another thread that you were a libertarian and I thought they believed in absolute morals.

[GhostHawk]

Kenny would you consider someone taking a picture of your car parked on the street theft?

Nothing is being taken from you. How are you losing? Theft is the removal of something that you own, putting that item in the thiefs pocket, and taking it out of yours. Leaving you without it.

In criminal law, theft (also known as stealing or filching) is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent

I don't see how you can call something that leaves you with what you started with theft.

Morally wrong perhaps, that side of your argument I can see.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by tompe

Strange, you said on another thread that you were a libertarian and I thought they believed in absolute morals.

I don't know why you believed that, cause I never said it.

[llreader]

Originally Posted by kennyc

As ebooks and digital property predate the current upcoming changes.

Please, tell me more. What is going to happen?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by GhostHawk

Kenny would you consider someone taking a picture of your car parked on the street theft?

Nothing is being taken from you. How are you losing? Theft is the removal of something that you own, putting that item in the thiefs pocket, and taking it out of yours. Leaving you without it.

In criminal law, theft (also known as stealing or filching) is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent

I don't see how you can call something that leaves you with what you started with theft.

Morally wrong perhaps, that side of your argument I can see.

You can't think of property rights only in physical terms. That is a mistake in this day and age. That is what must change.

This is not about current legal definitions (law) this is about changing those definitions.

I know you can't understand it. That's okay though. I have hope.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by llreader

Please, tell me more. What is going to happen?

I'm not allowed to tell you, or I'd have to kill you.


All will be revealed ..... in the future.