radha on 26 February 2009
| numonex said: Piracy, whatever it is, is not stealing. You are making a mistake of treating information with the same kind of moral metrics that we traditionally use for material objects. Consider these facts about the proposition: A steals X from B: * A no longer owns X * X is no longer owned by A. * B now owns X Now consider the facts about the proposition: A copies X from B without A’s consent. * A continues to own X * X is owned by A * X is owned by B * B continues to own X These relationships can be expressed in many different ways, what is inescapable about them is the unauthorized copying is not stealing. The closest you can come to equating copying with stealing is if you speak not of the thing copied but of the "act of purchase". That is, that what is being deprived from B is A's act of purchase. But this in itself is a nonsense because it assumed that A would in all cases have purchased x from B. People who copy information, like people who gossip (the analogy of passing on “unauthorized” information here is intentional), are not thieves. They may not be as morally wholesome as saints but they only commit he crime of theft in your antiquated and mistaken view of the ontology of information. Information is not an object. |
exactly my point and that is why piracy should not be fought in poor countries, becuase it will not add revenue, people will just stop getting the product, becuase buying is not posible at the current prices. The real solution is to make the product economicly accesible.
dd if = /dev/brain | tail -f | grep games | nc -lnvvp 80
Hey Listen!
