3 ms·

> So... the only way a fake dollar bill isn't genuine is that the paper it's made from is not blessed by the US government? No, a dollar bill that was not bles

> So... the only way a fake dollar bill isn't genuine is that the paper it's made from is not blessed by the US government? No, a dollar bill that was not blessed by the FED does not fulfill the one and only function of a currency of being an accounting tool for people's economic contributions to society. A copy of a windows disc is functionally identical to a "genuine" windows disc. > The least he could have done was tell the customers they are "replicas" or whatever. Well, sure he could. But why should he, legal reasons aside? Should ISPs label all websites as "replicas" because you receive a copy made by the ISP? > But he'd make less money. So? Is it ethically wrong to do something that earns you more money? > Also the guy himself expected the software on that "plastic" to be 98% accurate. Source? In particular, what kind of inaccuracies are we talking about? > Since you have no problem with getting fakes without knowing in advance, how would you feel if the next time your parents give you allowance money they were "98% accurate" fakes? I have a problem with getting fakes without knowing in advance. I just don't subscribe to the idea that an identical copy of digital data is a fake.

close04 8y ago
> [basically the whole comment] B.S. > a dollar bill Actually that is not the purpose of money (maybe one of them). But we just agreed that if it's identical (or you know, at least 98% accurate) I can put someone else's "seal of approval" and be totally legit. You can't have it both ways. The seller should be honest about what he's selling. You asking "why?" says a lot. The issue that was described pretty clearly for most people around here isn't the theft of software but the fact that the guy put MS and Dell labels on the physical object (the CD) without any legal right. Oh, if we "just" put the legal reasons aside sure, this is totally legit. Just like every other crime out there ;). > Source? In particular, what kind of inaccuracies are we talking about? Source? Try the links in my comment. It was in the guy's email, presented as evidence in court. Reading before replying helps make your comment a little more relevant. The first things that come to mind is that he used a very outdated image and subpar CD blanks to cut costs. > I just don't subscribe to the idea that an identical copy of digital data is a fake. There are people who don't subscribe to the idea that a woman should be allowed to change her mind during intercourse. There was already an agreement in place. Does this make them right? Back to out topic, the physical CD with fake labels is a fake, as was made very clear in the many official quotes I put in the comment. What if I put a Nike label on my fake a*s home-made shoes and sell them to you for $200? I'm innocent right? The shoes are my own creation and apparently I'm free to use someone else's name as I see fit. Legit. Law aside... The "I reject your reality and substitute my own" argument doesn't make for a good defense argument in court or a good comment.

close04 8y ago

> [basically the whole comment] B.S. > a dollar bill Actually that is not the purpose of money (maybe one of them). But we just agreed that if it's identical (or you know, at least 98% accurate) I can put someone else's "seal of approval" and be totally legit. You can't have it both ways. The seller should be honest about what he's selling. You asking "why?" says a lot. The issue that was described pretty clearly for most people around here isn't the theft of software but the fact that the guy put MS and Dell labels on the physical object (the CD) without any legal right. Oh, if we "just" put the legal reasons aside sure, this is totally legit. Just like every other crime out there ;). > Source? In particular, what kind of inaccuracies are we talking about? Source? Try the links in my comment. It was in the guy's email, presented as evidence in court. Reading before replying helps make your comment a little more relevant. The first things that come to mind is that he used a very outdated image and subpar CD blanks to cut costs. > I just don't subscribe to the idea that an identical copy of digital data is a fake. There are people who don't subscribe to the idea that a woman should be allowed to change her mind during intercourse. There was already an agreement in place. Does this make them right? Back to out topic, the physical CD with fake labels is a fake, as was made very clear in the many official quotes I put in the comment. What if I put a Nike label on my fake a*s home-made shoes and sell them to you for $200? I'm innocent right? The shoes are my own creation and apparently I'm free to use someone else's name as I see fit. Legit. Law aside... The "I reject your reality and substitute my own" argument doesn't make for a good defense argument in court or a good comment.