Author: Mark Young
Date: 00:15:59 07/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 21, 1998 at 21:20:34, Fernando Villegas wrote: >Well, finally the word and critical phrase has been oppenly written by Mrs Hyatt >and Moreland, the current judges of morality here in CCC. Finally they have >indulged tehmselves in unleashing all the amount of his wrath: I am a thief. >Why I am a thief? Because: >a) I got a Sargon V copy for free >b) I made some statements trying to argue that software uses and abuses are not >not the same that those present around other products and that to copy once or >twice -whom do more than that?- cannot be described as larceny, except just from >a pure theroetically, abstract and finally ridiculous way of looking this world. >I ask to the readers of this "discussion" to judge the tone, the words and the >arrogance of these gentlemen. They have flamed me because I have been not one of >those hypocrites so abundant in certain puritan environments. I have just >recognized the fact that probably almost all of us do some lesser, minor degree >of copying and that that behaviour has became so a rooted part of the software >culture that is surely incorporated in the economy of this field and so you >cannot, except if you ARE ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE SO LIMITED IN HIS UNDERSTANDING >THAT CANNOT UNDESTAND NOTHING IN THIS WORLD BEYOND PRINTED WORDS, qualify that >as burglary or larceny. >No being enough to qualify me as a thief, they say that my arguments are stupid, >ridiculous, etc. So they qualify me also as an idiot. In fact, I am. If I was >not one, surely I had not expended my time reasonning with people so childishly >stucked in abstract, simpistic, legalistic and unrealistic views. Probably the >example of the car was not very good; the problem is I tried to get one enough >simple to be understood, even throught its faults, by these gentlemen. Of course >I know a CAR CANNOT BE DUPLICATE, so to explain that supposing you does not know >it, is a show of undescribable naivete. With the same logic these gentlemen >could explain me that the Earth is not flat. Thanks in advance for the >information. What surely they does not know is that the famous -or unfamous- >difference made by software producer between the posesion of the phisical >vehicle of the software and the use of the software is completely artificial. >With the same reason General Motors could say that when we buy a car we are not >buying the design behind it. So what? What matter in a merchandise is not the >posession of the right to the design, but the use of it. In the case of >software, the use of it includes the likelihood to copy the material part of it >as much that is technically possible and it is so due precisely to the design in >itself. We are not talking here of dissambling a program for industrial copying, >but a simple copy with the simplest tools any computer user have in his machine. >And if a producer does not want to aloud that, he ever can do the all thing >umpossible to copy, as in some programs happens. But if not, then we can >presume that a margin of freedom is implicitly given to us respect to that. >If you cannot understand that, difference between margins, between degress in >the things of this world, if you only understand things in order of black and >white and still you qualify a simple coy as an unfamous act of burglary, then >nothing more can be added. Finally, I will not continue this, no matter what >these gentlemen can add, if they do. It is imposible to discuss with anybody >that puts himself in such an arrogant position of superior morality and >interpreter of the law, without giving not even a milimter to the oponent >arguments or trying to open his minds to other aspects of the things. And less >with people that indulges in the use of derogative sentences and judgements, >adding personal attacks so easily made from the distance and facing a computer. >Fernando I don't agree with you but I was not making a moral judgement. But facts are facts and words do mean things. And it is stealing to take copies of software you do not pay for. I have more then one computer and I only buy one copy of any program, and I will install the copy on more then one computer if I wish to. I think under some agreements that’s stealing to. I just will not try to argue that its not. I will call a spade a spade. If you want to take copies of programs that fine. But don't try to fool yourself by trying to get others to agree with you.
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.