AquaBlaze
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| reply to cdru
Re: My wife was one of them
said by cdru  :While what was said is different, it's still almost the exact same message. Contextually, but not morally. Copyright infringement is simply not following legal code, but you aren't depriving anyone of anything physical (ie. theft). Saying infringement is in the same realm as theft (in terms of moral obligations) is like saying murder is akin to stealing.
Not to mention the OP has paid for a copy of the book already. Where exactly is the damage done, other than the OP doing something with his purchase that the content's author doesn't condone? |
|
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
 ·Verizon FIOS
| said by AquaBlaze :said by cdru :While what was said is different, it's still almost the exact same message. Contextually, but not morally. Copyright infringement is simply not following legal code, but you aren't depriving anyone of anything physical (ie. theft). Saying infringement is in the same realm as theft (in terms of moral obligations) is like saying murder is akin to stealing. I don't believe I said anything about morals. Morals are very subjective and are in the eyes of the beholder. My guess is that J.K Rawlings and the publishers would have much rather had a single copy of their book stolen and deprived them of that $19.99 in revenue then to have one book not stolen, but had every page copied and distributed across the internet. They were not only protecting their financial interests in what they've spent developing the book, but also the overall interests of the franchise.
I won't argue with you that copyright infringement doesn't deprive someone of a physical object (be it money, property, etc). But copyright infringement and theft are closer to one another then your comparison of stealing to murder. All the above are illegal, from a strict moral standpoint all are bad. To what degree they are bad is up to the legal system. That is why we have difference classes of crimes as well as sentencing standards.
Not to mention the OP has paid for a copy of the book already. Where exactly is the damage done, other than the OP doing something with his purchase that the content's author doesn't condone? What did the OP purchase? He purchased a book that will be made available in a few days. He did not purchase the rights to obtain a copy by whatever means possible whenever he chose. Sure there is not real measurable amount of damage done. That is why copyright holders don't often go after people who merely download pirated content. They usually go after the ones that upload the content too. But that none the less makes it right.
--
Go Colts |
|
AquaBlaze
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| said by cdru :Not to mention the OP has paid for a copy of the book already. Where exactly is the damage done, other than the OP doing something with his purchase that the content's author doesn't condone? What did the OP purchase? He purchased a book that will be made available in a few days. He did not purchase the rights to obtain a copy by whatever means possible whenever he chose. *shrugs* Those two are in about the same to me. I personally don't feel anything when I'm downloading a CD that I've already purchased years ago.
Basically, I equate downloading content that you've paid for to purchasing IKEA furniture, but not assembling it in the manner the vendor specified. From a legal standpoint, I'm dead wrong...but from an aspect of morals, I feel I've already met my obligations by paying them.
I was more trying to address the people who were following up the OP with the "what morals are we teaching our children?!?" line. Copyright infringement != stealing. There's a reason for the difference in legal terms, and it's not just because using extra words is fun. |
|
BVT
join:2004-10-25
Mount Juliet, TN
| reply to AquaBlaze
Why does everyone try to claim "morals?" Define "morals" to everyone. How can a community have the same "morals" when a community is a collection of individuals?
I see nothing wrong in downloading software, music, movies, etc... All it is is a collection of 0s & 1s.
I don't approve of beastiality. Maybe you do. Who is right; who is wrong?
The only counter argument that can be offered against the morality issue is that we elect people to run our country based on the "moral" majority rules. However, you can easily see that the elected officials do not vote based on the morals of the people that elected them. They vote based on their morals. (See the illegal alien debate.) That argument falls flat.
It is awful easy to setback and claim the "moral" obligation has been broken by the downloaders. Yet, I bet you continually break some law, speeding, perhaps turning right before a complete stop, or, you are one of the bastards that dont wash their hands after using the toilet then tosses a salad for a waiting customer. Do you feel "morally" wrong? |
|
AquaBlaze
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
edit:
July 18th, @02:15PM
| There are some certain morals that run through almost every culture. I can't say I've seen a whole lot of civilizations promote rampant stealing and/or murder, usually those things are frowned upon.
As for your example about bestiality being proper and otherwise, as history has shown, it just depends on who's on top. 
said by BVT :It is awful easy to setback and claim the "moral" obligation has been broken by the downloaders. I do feel that those that purely download umpteen volumes of modern-day garbage without any intent to pay should be clocked in the head. They should pay *something* to the artist/label for said amounts, or simply do without said pirated booty. Just because you can get away with it doesn't mean you should.
However, do I believe the RIAA jingle that every download is a lost sale? That downloading (ie. copyright infringement) = stealing? Hell no.
said by BVT :Yet, I bet you continually break some law, speeding, perhaps turning right before a complete stop, or, you are one of the bastards that dont wash their hands after using the toilet then tosses a salad for a waiting customer. Do you feel "morally" wrong? To answer your questions:
I don't feel "bad" about going ~5 MPH over the speed limit, no. I can handle my car, know the terrain, and haven't been in an accident (or even close to one) because of it. No, I don't feel bad as it's a victimless "crime".
As for salads, yes, I would feel bad. If my job is to toss salads and I don't practice expected hygiene, then I'm royally screwing over a job that I voluntarily signed up for. Would I feel bad from a moral standpoint? Not nearly as much as I feel the shame from being crappy at such a simple job. I like to take pride in my work. |
|
Xizer
join:2004-02-05
Kenosha, WI
edit:
July 18th, @03:37PM
| There are some certain morals that run through almost every culture. I can't say I've seen a whole lot of civilizations promote rampant stealing and/or murder, usually those things are frowned upon.
 |
|
AquaBlaze
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| And your point is? Warring factions see one another as a threat, and with such, moral ideals go out the window. Hell, murder is wrong, but you'd bet your sweet ass we expect a US soldier is going to shoot an insurgent taking a bead on him.
I don't think all of Africa adopts a "shoot whomever, it's all good" policy, as much as you'd like to infer with the picture. |
|
BVT
join:2004-10-25
Mount Juliet, TN
| reply to AquaBlaze
Good comebacks for all of those. Bravo
The moral issue aggravates me. I bet most people that have grown up with PCs do not view downloading stuff as a crime. Since most of those people do not vote, nothing much will change until the current "for the companies" cronies are voted out, or die, which ever comes first. |
|
