3 ms·
I do not think this is well explained. There is no point in going on about whether password sharing is a bad thing. That is is already very clear in the legal s
by ggchappell 15y ago
I do not think this is well explained. There is no point in going on about whether password sharing is a bad thing. That is is already very clear in the legal system. If it is a TOS violation, then a contract or license has been breached; that is officially "bad".
However, that kind of "bad" is normally a civil matter. This bill appears to be moving it into the criminal realm. Thus, the key paragraph in the article is this one:
> Under the measure, download services that believe they are getting ripped off can go to law enforcement authorities and press charges.
But I would change "they are getting ripped off" to the more factual "their terms of service are being violated" -- assuming that is what the bill actually says (which seems likely).
Thus, the real point here seems to be that -- as is becoming more common of late -- the police and the criminal courts are being pressed into service as an enforcement arm of the entertainment industry (and possibly other industries as well, depending on how broad the language of the bill is).
- arethuza 15y agoI think the "logic" goes something like this: - Breaking TOS means you are taking something without the owners approval - Taking something without the owners approval is theft - Theft is a criminal offence Note: I am not agreeing with the bill, far from it. Just that I can see how it is pretty simple to create an argument in this area that would probably sounds fairly reasonable to a lot of people.
- ggchappell 15y agoI don't think there's any "logic" required. If we could argue that breaking TOS were already a criminal offense, then we wouldn't need the bill.