Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:00:09 07/20/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 20, 1998 at 20:23:39, Fernando Villegas wrote: >On July 20, 1998 at 14:31:54, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >> >>On July 20, 1998 at 11:54:38, Fernando Villegas wrote: >> >>There was a lot to comment on here, but I will comment on only a little. >> >>>¿Shouldn't be so? Maybe, but is is so. Like in everything else, sin and santity >>>mixs a lot. I don't feel any pride because I have received programs, I don't >>>feel priode either because I have given programs, but surely I don't feel to be >>>a thief because I have done both things. >> >>This is what I can't understand. It is not so much that you pirate the >>software, but rather that you claim that doing so is value neutral. >> >>I am sure that some other readers agree with you. I don't. >> >>bruce > > >Hi Bruce: >Maybe the problem arises for the sheer use of so a charged expresion as >"piracy". I agree with you that a russian zar copying a program thousand of >times to do business is a pirat, but just to do ocassionally a copy for a friend >or receive one in the same terms seems to me to be no more than the usual way >this kind of merchandise is used all around the world with full knowledege of >all parts. In any case, it does not means a damage for nobody, on the contrary. >When I purchase a program X and a friend purchase program Y and then we both >share the programs, the total sum of programs sold is two, but if any of us, >friends, were to assume the almost inhumane behaviour not to share nothing with >the other, the total sum would be not 4 programs, but maybe just one or none; >because part of the passion of this hobby and so the will to purchase take his >strenght from being a shared hobby; much of my interest would vanishes if i >could not share not only ideas but ocassionally something more with my relatives >in this issue. You see, Bruce, this is more a questions of human relations and >the way a certain behaviour is kept running than a legal issue that divides >people in good and bad guys. >Fernando But none of this gets past the basic point: when something is sold, and you obtain a copy without paying the purchase price, this is stealing (larceny) plain and simple. There is no defense, no justification, and no nice way of putting this. To imply that it is "o.k." to do this is not only a grossly wrong opinion, it is both criminally and morally wrong, and ought not be suggested nor tolerated. I can't believe the discussion is even going on. It's just like stealing from a bank, or from a department store. No difference at all. And it is also *wrong*.
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.