2 ms·

> You can't say that it was wilful civil disobedience and then say that he went about it the wrong way, you contradict yourself as that's kind of the definition

> You can't say that it was wilful civil disobedience and then say that he went about it the wrong way, you contradict yourself as that's kind of the definition of civil disobedience. I didn't mean "morally" wrong, I mean wrong approach. That's not contradictory at all; civil disobedience is not always the correct way to go about change. Sometimes it is, like when its done en-masse; going it alone, wrong approach. > And it's not theft Fine, infringing their data, irrelevant to the conversation; a crime no matter what label you want to apply. The right approach is to lobby to get the law changed, not break it by yourself and hope you don't get hammered.

ddingus 11y ago
You are very seriously misinformed. For there to be a defensible claim of theft, the property owner must lose their property. Someone experiences something missing. Infringement exists as a concept and an element of law because it is not theft, specifically.
- gnaritas 11y ago
  Already corrected that, not germane to the point; he wasn't charged with theft.
igravious 11y ago
> Sometimes it is, like when its done en-masse; going it alone, wrong approach. Perhaps, perhaps not. There's certainly safety in numbers. But this issue is not a huge social issue like, say, nationalist causes or other political issues. This is a kind of geeky issue that only a small fraction of the population gets but that everybody should care about. Also the law-breaking is doing no-one any physical harm. Nobody is going to go hungry because they are deprived of food. Some argue that mp3 downloads have not affected the music industry's revenues and profits, or at least not by the vast amounts they claim. Similarly I imagine the out of pocket hit to JSTOR to be pretty small, but couple that with the fact that a lot of academic papers were funded by public money then people start seeing things differently. Hence the open-access journal movement and Arxiv and so on. And what about the benefits to society brought about by giving wider access to knowledge? One could start to take a pretty dim view of the ridiculous prices the JSTORs and Elseviers charge. > it's irrelevant to the conversation. It's not totally irrelevant. Stealing/theft sounds worse than infringement. Look, I'm not having a go at you. I just think that Aaron was justified in what he did and I admire him for what he did. There are times for emailing and times for plugging in a network cable, Aaron chose the cable and I don't think that was the wrong approach even though it ended tragically.
- gnaritas 11y ago
  Hey, I agree with Aaron's position that the data should be freely accessible, so no need to sell me on that or the fact it was non-violent, that's not in contention. > Stealing/theft sounds worse than infringement. It's not relevant because this conversation isn't about how it sounds, it's about who's to blame for his death. None of which has anything to do with what the particular charges were. > I just think that Aaron was justified in what he did and I admire him for what he did. There are times for emailing and times for plugging in a network cable, Aaron chose the cable and I don't think that was the wrong approach even though it ended tragically. And that's your right, personally I admire the principles, but his approach was naive and imho not worth admiration; his suicide tragic and also not worth admiration. It was the wrong approach because a bad outcome for Aaron was predictable from the onset that led to a needless suicide of a very talented individual. You can't flagrantly commit federal crimes and think jail isn't an option, regardless of the merits of those laws.
ddingus 11y ago
Not all crimes are equal.
- gnaritas 11y ago
  > Not all crimes are equal. Never said or implied they were, so what are you responding to?

ddingus 11y ago

You are very seriously misinformed. For there to be a defensible claim of theft, the property owner must lose their property. Someone experiences something missing. Infringement exists as a concept and an element of law because it is not theft, specifically.

gnaritas 11y ago
Already corrected that, not germane to the point; he wasn't charged with theft.

igravious 11y ago

> Sometimes it is, like when its done en-masse; going it alone, wrong approach. Perhaps, perhaps not. There's certainly safety in numbers. But this issue is not a huge social issue like, say, nationalist causes or other political issues. This is a kind of geeky issue that only a small fraction of the population gets but that everybody should care about. Also the law-breaking is doing no-one any physical harm. Nobody is going to go hungry because they are deprived of food. Some argue that mp3 downloads have not affected the music industry's revenues and profits, or at least not by the vast amounts they claim. Similarly I imagine the out of pocket hit to JSTOR to be pretty small, but couple that with the fact that a lot of academic papers were funded by public money then people start seeing things differently. Hence the open-access journal movement and Arxiv and so on. And what about the benefits to society brought about by giving wider access to knowledge? One could start to take a pretty dim view of the ridiculous prices the JSTORs and Elseviers charge. > it's irrelevant to the conversation. It's not totally irrelevant. Stealing/theft sounds worse than infringement. Look, I'm not having a go at you. I just think that Aaron was justified in what he did and I admire him for what he did. There are times for emailing and times for plugging in a network cable, Aaron chose the cable and I don't think that was the wrong approach even though it ended tragically.

gnaritas 11y ago
Hey, I agree with Aaron's position that the data should be freely accessible, so no need to sell me on that or the fact it was non-violent, that's not in contention. > Stealing/theft sounds worse than infringement. It's not relevant because this conversation isn't about how it sounds, it's about who's to blame for his death. None of which has anything to do with what the particular charges were. > I just think that Aaron was justified in what he did and I admire him for what he did. There are times for emailing and times for plugging in a network cable, Aaron chose the cable and I don't think that was the wrong approach even though it ended tragically. And that's your right, personally I admire the principles, but his approach was naive and imho not worth admiration; his suicide tragic and also not worth admiration. It was the wrong approach because a bad outcome for Aaron was predictable from the onset that led to a needless suicide of a very talented individual. You can't flagrantly commit federal crimes and think jail isn't an option, regardless of the merits of those laws.

ddingus 11y ago

Not all crimes are equal.

gnaritas 11y ago
> Not all crimes are equal. Never said or implied they were, so what are you responding to?