Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:42:00 07/21/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 21, 1998 at 18:40:20, Don Dailey wrote: >>>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*. >> >>It should be the same like stealing from a bank, or from a department store >> >>It is not the same because most of the humans do not see it like that >>If I see someone is stealing from a bank I will call the police but if I know >>someone is stealing programs I will not do it because I do not want everybody to >>hate me >> >>Uri > > >The difference is in the amount stolen and the use of violence. >If you steal 10 dollars from a bank by finding a clever non-violoent >way to do this which is virutally guaranteed not to get you caught, >then it might not seem so bad (although it is in my opinion) If you >bend over and pick up a lost dollar you think nothing of it, but if >you find $100 then you debate your conscience about whether to make >an attempt to locate the owner. Is there a difference? I'm not sure >about the missing money and I think it is an example of something that >might not be so clear cut. I disagree with Bob and Bruce that >everything is black and white, but I agree with them both that >software piracy is stealing and cannot be justified. With software >piracy, the chances of getting caught are astronomically low and >I think that can affect our judgements. Also, it's a case of group >reinforcement or mob mentality. We are conditioned by life to >compare, and if everyone is doing something, it's really hard to >see it as wrong. It almost seems to become right by consent. > I don't view the amount stolen, or the lack/presence of violence when stealing it as having anything to do with whether it is right or wrong. It is stealing. Stealing is against the law. Hence, by definition, it is wrong. We are not talking about finding a piece of software laying on the street. We are talking about someone buying a copy, then giving away copies for nothing. And, according to the license agreement included with all commercial computer software, that is forbidden, is against the law, and, again, hence is wrong. >The question you must ask is how do you define right and wrong? >Is it defined by the mean behavior of the population or is it >an independent standard? Most people, myself included, are >extremely influenced by the behaviors and values of others but >I believe personally this is wrong. That's why I also believe how >you choose your closest friends is pretty important. >I noticed as a child my behavior conformed to the type of friends >I had. I don't think we ever outgrow this completely but must >always take care to watch ourselves. It's not about "right and wrong". It is about honoring a license agreement that you agree to honor when you buy and open a piece of software. You agree to the terms, then decide that you aren't going to abide by them. That is not "right or wrong".. it is *illegal*. > >This is a matter where we much choose our own actions and make >our own judgments. I defend Fernando for getting a copy of a >program that is not attainable from anywhere else and don't see >anyone getting hurt over this. Perhaps my judgement is wrong >on this point and I admit it could be. From what I've heard >from him he does not seek out free software but does feel a >sense of obligation as far as purchase is concerned. And maybe >it's even true that he has rationalized things in his mind. >Should we all rush to be the first to throw the stones at him? > >- Don your judgement is wrong. It is illegal anywhere in the USA to obtain a copy of a piece of software that you did not purchase, because wherever you obtain such a copy, *they* were bound by a license agreement between them and the software producer. And they are stealing from the producer. And you are knowingly receiving stolen goods and can be sentenced to the exact same prison or hit with the same fine as they can, because you are engaged in a conspiricy to defraud the original producer of profit. He also stated that "if a friend asks me for a copy, should I tell the friend 'no'? or should I treat him as a friend and give him a free copy?" He then went on to say that he does the latter. Do you not agree that is *illegal* both with US and international copyright / patent laws? I see no way to justify his statement, and find such a topic totally offensive for those that choose to sell software of any kind for a living. If Ed didn't care about copies, he'd be doing as I do with Crafty, and giving the thing away for nothing. He sells it. I assume he wants to eat. And he has the right to expect that each copy of Rebel used around the world contributed to his income. I agree with him 100%...
This page took 0 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.