3 ms·

There's that legalistic nitpicking again. Google is a general purpose service. People actually use it for lawful purposes, maybe even most of the time. On the o

There's that legalistic nitpicking again. Google is a general purpose service. People actually use it for lawful purposes, maybe even most of the time. On the other hand, the whole point of the Pirate Bay is to violate copyright. I've never seen it used for a lawful purpose, though I am sure it is occasionally. That's a substantive difference. It would ring a lot more honest to me if the defenders of Pirate Bay said "I like to download things and I think current IP laws are wrong". That's a valid position that can be argued. This position just seems childish to me, and not a brilliant defense as some say. If I sold guns in packages with maps and schedules of the daily habits of people's enemies, who later ended up dead, I am pretty sure they would still lock me up for being an accessory to murder. As they ought. On another thread, Pirate Bay's defenders said that such a business should be legal, too, as the businessman isn't actually doing anything wrong. That, to me, is a sign that they have sacrificed prudence in support of their agenda. I like The Pirate Bay. I want to see them survive. That doesn't mean I have to accept bad arguments just because I am on their side.

unalone 18y ago
There's that legalistic nitpicking again. Google is a general purpose service. People actually use it for lawful purposes, maybe even most of the time. On the other hand, the whole point of the Pirate Bay is to violate copyright. I've never seen it used for a lawful purpose, though I am sure it is occasionally. That's a substantive difference. It would ring a lot more honest to me if the defenders of Pirate Bay said "I like to download things and I think current IP laws are wrong". Defenders do say that. I say that. The point I was making is that TPB isn't breaking the law. Even if they're helping other people break it, they themselves are innocent. To use your gun analogy, if, rather than selling guns, you're the guy that gives directions to people looking for guns, then you're innocent. You're not touching the guns. You're just handing out directions. That's a valid position that can be argued. This position just seems childish to me, and not a brilliant defense as some say. A bunch of amateurs are beating powerful corporations in court. That's maybe not brilliant, but it's certainly impressive.

unalone 18y ago

There's that legalistic nitpicking again. Google is a general purpose service. People actually use it for lawful purposes, maybe even most of the time. On the other hand, the whole point of the Pirate Bay is to violate copyright. I've never seen it used for a lawful purpose, though I am sure it is occasionally. That's a substantive difference. It would ring a lot more honest to me if the defenders of Pirate Bay said "I like to download things and I think current IP laws are wrong". Defenders do say that. I say that. The point I was making is that TPB isn't breaking the law. Even if they're helping other people break it, they themselves are innocent. To use your gun analogy, if, rather than selling guns, you're the guy that gives directions to people looking for guns, then you're innocent. You're not touching the guns. You're just handing out directions. That's a valid position that can be argued. This position just seems childish to me, and not a brilliant defense as some say. A bunch of amateurs are beating powerful corporations in court. That's maybe not brilliant, but it's certainly impressive.