Posted by Karrde on 09/14/05 16:16

"Don M." <newsreader@nospam4fineartsnospam.com> wrote in message
news:8fWdneIQFtofWrreRVnyig@giganews.com...

>> If something is the "moral equivalent" to stealing, why would it not BE
>> stealing?
>
>
> You may be right. Greed is the moral equivalent to stealing, so perhaps
> the entertainment
> industry IS stealing.

Justification for crappy behavior. Do you think it's okay to steal a pair
of shoes because you think Nike charges more than YOU decide they should?
There is so much wrong with that attitude that I can't even begin to scratch
the surface of it.

> OTOH, copyright infringement is neither the moral nor the legal
> equivalent to stealing.

"Legal" does not concern me. There is plenty that is legal that shouldn't
be, and even more things that are incorrectly deemed illegal by the justice
system. What concerns me in this debate is the moral. Copyright
infringement IS morally wrong. What's more is that, in the case of the
Episode 3 DVD, the print was stolen and copies made. It's not like somebody
bought the DVD and put it up on the net for others to download. If somebody
stole a big screen TV from Best Buy, would you be comfortable buying it from
them? Would you feel justified if the crook just gave it to you?

I just noticed that this thread is crossposted, so I apologize to AFSers for
riling up the members of the music stealing newsgroup. All future posts in
this thread by me will correct this fundamental breach in netiquette and
will only be posted to AFS.

--K

[Back to original message]