4 ms·
You're still assuming that everyone wants to rip off content for free, but we know that isn't really the case at all. Many people do understand and accept the i
by Silhouette 7y ago
You're still assuming that everyone wants to rip off content for free, but we know that isn't really the case at all. Many people do understand and accept the idea that you don't just take something that someone else worked to create without paying a fair price for it. Given reasonable copyright reforms that eliminate most of the dubious biases of our current systems, it's not implausible that most people would continue to cooperate and thus support the creation of works that they then get to enjoy. But making it explicitly legal to rip things sends a very different message to normal people about what society considers ethical behaviour.
A relevant analogy might be using mobile phones while driving. Here in the UK, using a handheld phone while driving became illegal quite some time ago. And so it should; the evidence that driving while distracted by a phone makes you much more dangerous is beyond dispute. Most people accepted this, perhaps because there was also a decent public information campaign about the risks, and many did stop using their phones on the move even if they used to before. A few persist, and you can usually spot them from the way they're swerving at random intervals, unable to maintain a consistent speed, running lights, and otherwise making the same sorts of basic mistakes that a drunk driver would, and although we have a problem with a lack of policing resources to catch them, those who do get caught are punished.
Now, here's the catch. The evidence used to support the ban on using a handheld phone while driving also shows very clearly that the main problem isn't the physical part of holding the device, it's the distraction from using it. That means hands-free calling is almost as dangerous as using a handheld phone while driving. However, our government did not see fit to make using a hands-free call illegal at the same time, arguing that enforcement would be impractical.
The day after the ban came in, there were huge displays of hands-free kits in the front of every supermarket and phone shop in the land, with banners saying things like "Stay safe -- use a hands-free kit". Not stay legal. Stay safe. And to this day, people are dying unnecessarily on our roads, because the government gave a free endorsement to an incredibly dangerous practice by implicitly condoning it.
- michaelmrose 7y ago> Given reasonable copyright reforms that eliminate most of the dubious biases of our current systems, it's not implausible that most people would continue to cooperate and thus support the creation of works that they then get to enjoy. This is very nearly impossible > But making it explicitly legal to rip things sends a very different message to normal people about what society considers ethical behaviour. Virtually no normal people feel bad about downloading things. If that was the battle its long ago been lost. The people that think there still is a battle to be won are a tiny minority of the richest in the world. Good luck convincing people who make a fraction of what people in the US make that they ought to pay as much for entertainment as they do for food.