Posted by FatKat on 09/14/05 16:53

Anonymous wrote:
> "Don M." <newsreader@nospam4fineartsnospam.com> wrote in message
> news:8fWdneIQFtofWrreRVnyig@giganews.com...
> >
> > "Karrde" <karrde_smuggler_@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:4327b251_2@x-privat.org...
> >>
> >> "anthonyberet" <nospam@me.invalid> wrote in message
> > news:3om1pqF6hj27U1@individual.net...
> >> > Karrde wrote:
> >> >
> >> > OH, FFS! - When is this old chestnut going to be put to bed?
> >> > - It is *not* stealing. The legal definition of stealing is quite
> >> > specific, and does not apply to copyright infringement.
> >> > You may personally think it is morally equivalent to stealing, but it
> >> > is
> >> > quite untrue to say it *is* stealing.
> >>
> >> 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.
>
> I can think of many times that I have felt "ripped off" after leaving the
> theater. What file sharing does is put pressure on the movie industry to
> actually make *gasp*..........good movies. Movies that are woth the price
> of admission.
>
That's a tantalizing rationale - we're just getting back at those
Hollywood hacks. But if that were true, we probably wouldn't be
stealing at all. Sounds ironic that we're blaming the industry for
generating crap, yet steal...er...copy their crap nonetheless.

[Back to original message]