5 ms·

The mistake in this analogy is that the stars in boxes represent things one already has, while the dollar signs represent things one might get in the future. C

• boredguy8 18y ago
  "Causing someone not to get income they might otherwise have gotten is not theft." If it were, Blizzard would lose the biggest class-action lawsuit in the world! I mean, if all the time I spent playing Starcraft were spent doing something productive...
• blogimus 18y ago
  I would say "A mistake" rather than "The mistake." Another mistake in this analogy is that between criminal and civil law. Theft, in most if not all countries, is a criminal offense. Piracy, formally known as copyright infringement (or copyright violation), is a criminal offense when done for financial gain, civil offense otherwise in countries which recognize software copyright. The vast majority of occurrences of copyright violation we see in the media are for personal use, not financial gain, thereby a largely civil legal matter, than a criminal one. Hence theft as a comparison is inaccurate.
  • alex_c 18y ago
    That's what annoys me about this endless argument. The entire reason it's endless is because it confuses and mingles legal and moral aspects: - Yes, it's illegal. I don't think anyone actually argues it's not, but somehow it still keeps popping up as an argument to support that it's theft. - Legally, as far as I know, theft and copyright infringement have very different meanings. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm willing to bet that neither are any of the people arguing piracy=theft. Anyway, I don't really see how arguing and personal opinions can come into this. The law is what it is. - Morally, it's hard to argue that it's right, but at least this is the only part where you CAN actually have any kind of debate. People arguing about different things without realizing it = recipe for endless, unproductive argument.
    • blogimus 18y ago
      I don't disagree that copyright infringement is bad for those in our business who rely on sales of software or media licenses. And sure there are negative residuals like trickle down economics of the media and software publishers. But it is not cut and dried/black and white. What about fair use? What about abandonware? The law is what it is only now. We (as a society) change the law as we use it. The new round of IP laws, such as the DMCA, are new and the full effects not yet known. Arguing about this is good because it fosters thinking and may prompt people to actually DO something to improve our current situation.
      • netcan 18y ago
        I think the problem was with bad arguing. One person arguing the legality. Another, the morality. A third steps in with semantics. Since they all use the same words they think hey are talking about the same thing. But they are not. If you replaced the words they used with the words they mean they'd sound like a pack of hyenas.
        • blogimus 18y ago
          Welcome to humanity.
          • netcan 18y ago
            nice to meet you
            • blogimus 18y ago
              Likewise.
        • RobertL 18y ago
          To take it one step further the problem is that everyone keeps talking around the fact that the entire argument is centered on "money" not "piracy". Before the internet and before personal computers artists had mechanical control of who had access to their products. That just isn't true anymore and what it means is that artists need to find some new business models. Once they do that the whole issue is going to go away. And that's a good thing, because I've been debating it since the internet was born and that's more than 15 years and I'm getting tired of going round and round and round on the same old arguments. Time to move on.
• startingup 18y ago
  If I hire a financial planner and he gave me bad advice, he could be liable (depending on the laws of the state, exclusions on the contract and so on). So bad analogy there.
  • netcan 18y ago
    No good analogy. Giving bad advice professionally can be illegal (so is piracy). But it's still not theft.