4 ms·

Because theft is immoral.

PaulRobinson 3y ago
Theft is immoral because if I steal your physical property, I have denied you access to, and use of, that property. If I copy your property, you still have access to, and use of, your property. I would argue that is not immoral. As a (recreational part-time), content creator myself, I would of course prefer it if people paid me so I didn’t have to work every day. But I’d rather that be on the basis of somebody wanting me to thrive, and showing their support, rather than me threatening them with legal action because they can’t prioritise giving me money over other demands in their life. If you want a physical copy of some work, you need to pay for it. That’s moral. Digital copies? I think we’ve bought the myths of publishers and the content industry and it’s harming our education as a species.
- wang_li 3y ago
  Or theft is immoral because of unjust enrichment.
denkmoon 3y ago
Impeding the growth of humanity's knowledge and capability is immoral.
- wang_li 3y ago
  How far do you extend this idea? A dollar diverted to a poor person is a dollar that can’t be used to grow humanity’s knowledge and capabilities. Is it immoral to be poor? A dollar spent on beer? Time spent having sex instead of researching the mysteries of the universe? How about low intelligence people reproducing with other low intelligence people to make low intelligence babies (“Three generations of imbeciles is enough.”) that will have to be fed and clothed and sheltered? Should people be allowed to be homeless? Be drug addicts? In the grand scheme of things social programs have done way more harm to the advancement of knowledge than high textbook prices.
plaguepilled 3y ago
I agree, theft is, devoid of any context, immoral. However, I consider the privatisation of publically funded research to be (currently) legal theft. Edit: I realise this was an indirect response to your comment, so I would also like to add that a meta-point I want to make is that we came to almost polar opposite conclusions despite having the same "morality" to a certain accuracy. Therefore, it could be argued that morality is not a sufficient measure for lawmaking.
j_4 3y ago
Piracy is very different from theft and far more morally defensible. FWIW my work, which puts food on my table, is pirated every day.
birracerveza 3y ago
Except when it is moral, as is in Z-Library's case
account42 3y ago
So is misrepresenting something as theft.

Theft is immoral because if I steal your physical property, I have denied you access to, and use of, that property. If I copy your property, you still have access to, and use of, your property. I would argue that is not immoral. As a (recreational part-time), content creator myself, I would of course prefer it if people paid me so I didn’t have to work every day. But I’d rather that be on the basis of somebody wanting me to thrive, and showing their support, rather than me threatening them with legal action because they can’t prioritise giving me money over other demands in their life. If you want a physical copy of some work, you need to pay for it. That’s moral. Digital copies? I think we’ve bought the myths of publishers and the content industry and it’s harming our education as a species.

wang_li 3y ago
Or theft is immoral because of unjust enrichment.

denkmoon 3y ago

Impeding the growth of humanity's knowledge and capability is immoral.

wang_li 3y ago
How far do you extend this idea? A dollar diverted to a poor person is a dollar that can’t be used to grow humanity’s knowledge and capabilities. Is it immoral to be poor? A dollar spent on beer? Time spent having sex instead of researching the mysteries of the universe? How about low intelligence people reproducing with other low intelligence people to make low intelligence babies (“Three generations of imbeciles is enough.”) that will have to be fed and clothed and sheltered? Should people be allowed to be homeless? Be drug addicts? In the grand scheme of things social programs have done way more harm to the advancement of knowledge than high textbook prices.

plaguepilled 3y ago

I agree, theft is, devoid of any context, immoral. However, I consider the privatisation of publically funded research to be (currently) legal theft. Edit: I realise this was an indirect response to your comment, so I would also like to add that a meta-point I want to make is that we came to almost polar opposite conclusions despite having the same "morality" to a certain accuracy. Therefore, it could be argued that morality is not a sufficient measure for lawmaking.

j_4 3y ago

Piracy is very different from theft and far more morally defensible. FWIW my work, which puts food on my table, is pirated every day.

birracerveza 3y ago

Except when it is moral, as is in Z-Library's case

account42 3y ago

So is misrepresenting something as theft.