Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: More and Last About Piracy

Author: Don Dailey

Date: 22:05:17 07/21/98

Go up one level in this thread


On July 21, 1998 at 22:42:00, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>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.

Bob, this is so typical  of the way you  think.  To you it's right and
wrong, black  and white.   You   seem to think   only in  extremes.  I
actually agreed  with you in the  last paragraph about it  being wrong
and you keep restating the same old worn out point post after post.

The point I am making is not  whether it is wrong  or not, but whether
it makes sense  to view stealing a penny  the same as  stealing an old
ladies life savings.   I have no doubt   whatsover that you  will view
these two things as equal in severity.

I also am convinced, if we follow your reasoning,  that you must be an
incredibly  immoral person too like Fernando  obviously is.  Somewhere
down the  road you've surely  slipped up  and took  a pencil home from
work or some other  such deed that put's  you in the same  category as
the criminal Ferando and the guy that takes old ladies life savings.


>We are not talking about finding a piece of software laying on the street.

You're the one that doesn't differentiate.  I thought you said stealing
is stealing?

>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.


I think I've heard this point before Bob, and I even aknowledged it.
It is the only point you have made but it's taken you thousands of
words to drive it home.


>>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*.

I know, you've already make this point many times.


>>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.

Are you saying it is wrong?  I think I've heard this point.


>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 thought I agreed with this long ago?


>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%...

Don't you think enough is enough?   You have persued Fernando like a
bloodthirsty pack of dogs.   I really believe you are getting carried
away with your righteous indignation.


- Don



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.