superchunk said:
Kasz216 said:
superchunk said:
Kasz216 said:
superchunk said:
zarx said:
superchunk said:
Seece said:
Akvod said:
The difference is in consent. You can gain ownership, permanent or temporary, for free if you have the consent of the original owner.
Taking someone's property without their consent, is theft, a violation of their property rights, and their natural right as a human being. It is in essence, slavery, since you're making someone slave away creating something, and then just taking it away. It's not an issue of compensation either. It's CONSENT. |
Good post, sums it up perfectly.
|
I agree. Forget my post above, the definition of consent and theft is clearest difference.
|
well how about the difference between piracy and theft (theft = taking something from someone) (piracy = creating a copy of something that remains in possession of the owner)
|
"Taking someone's property (which includes digital copies) without their consent, is theft..."
|
I agree. So if they went into the developers computers, cut and pasted the game and left... they would be "taking their digital copies." Instead people are making their own digital copies. |
I don't know why I choose to get into these threads. Its always the same lame argument that a copy is not theft since the original still exists. But, that simply ignorant and petty. Its just a way for theives to tell themselves its ok, I'm not really commiting a crime.
Simply put, they don't have consent to make a copy and therefore doing so is theft of the content.
|
It's not lame. It's factual. The original still exists so it's not theft. Just how painting an exact copy of the mona lisa isn't theft because the Mona Lisa is still sitting in the Louvre. Software piracy is just a hell of a lot easier.
Also, I do not pirate. So try again.
|
Its not factual. You're missing the point behind 'consent'. You did not have consent to make a copy and use that copy. Therefore you did steal that content.
Also, I didn't say you did pirate. Hell, I do with certain things. I'm just not trying to sugar coat it.
|
You said it was just a way for theives to tell themselves it's ok. Thereby branding anyone who believes that... a theif.
If you rape someone, you did not have consent to rape them. However you aren't committing theft. You are committing Rape.
If you murder someone, you did not have consent to murder them. However you aren'tt committing theft. You are commiting murder.
If you copy the Mona Lisa perfectly you are not committing murder. You aren't committing any crime. Unless you try and sell it then it's counterfitting.
It's not the "consent" part that's relevent. It's the effect part. What happens to the person afflicted.
In theft they lose a possesion.
In rape they are attacked and violated
In murder they are attacked and killed
In artwork reproduction, they potentially lose a sale
In counterfitting they definitly lose a sale.
In software piracy, they potentially lose a sale... but it's really easy to do.
So Sofware Piracy is between artwork reproduction and counterfitting.
