3 ms·

a good argument for justification of piracy Which, by the way, is indistinguishable from rationalizing the sentiment of "I want stuff without having to pay for

a good argument for justification of piracy Which, by the way, is indistinguishable from rationalizing the sentiment of "I want stuff without having to pay for it"

paganel 14y ago
> "I want stuff without having to pay for it" I don't want to rationalize stuff, but I've just finished reading Locke's "Two Treatises on Government", one of the guys that started all this "the only true freedom is the protection of property"-thingie, and I just want to add that irrespective of the fact that one might agree or not with Locke's views you have to take into consideration that it has not always been like this (i.e. private property being "sacred" etc). In fact, Locke starts by arguing against people (Filmer and others) who were saying something of the like that the monarchs of the time had an irrevocable right to rule (and presumably to own everything under the skies), handed down (the right to rule) to them from generation to generation since Adam (the Genesis Adam). To say nothing of the 20th century madness that afflicted almost half of the known world, I'm talking about the Marxist/Leninist views on property. What I want to say is that what constitutes "property", "to own stuff" etc. has not always been "set in stone" as a "moral" thingie (whatever definition of "moral" you want to come up with). So people for whom piracy is "immoral" are taking a very short view of the whole thing, and possibly also deluding themselves into thinking that what is "moral" is almost by definition "immortal" and forever. They should take a more pragmatic view.
- pfedor 14y ago
  You could similarly defend any kind of stealing. The communists said "грабь награбленное", which means "steal what has been stolen". Here's the English-version of an article from The Great Soviet Encyclopedia: http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Expropriation+of+the+Expropriators http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Expropriation+of+... which advocates an equivalent of praptak's point of view applied to other kinds of property than the copyright.
jlgreco 14y ago
How is that so different from "I want to keep the rights to a cartoon I drew for ever and ever and ever.."?
- MartinCron 14y ago
  Of course it's not that different at all. Rationalizations happen on all sides. We're all guilty of them. I just think we should try to be honest with ourselves and each other.
  - jlgreco 14y ago
    I don't see much advantage to doing the 'honorable' thing in the face of corporations that won't. If doing the right thing anyway is your cup of tea, then knock yourself out, but I'm really not interested in that.
  - nitrogen 14y ago
    "Let's be honest" is just code for "you should feel guilty."
    - MartinCron 14y ago
      People who habitually rationalize self-serving behavior should feel guilty. That's what guilt is for.
guard-of-terra 14y ago
I have had a lot of stuff without paying for it (directly). Education, medical care, air even. What now?

a good argument for justification of piracy Which, by the way, is indistinguishable from rationalizing the sentiment of "I want stuff without having to pay for it"

paganel 14y ago

> "I want stuff without having to pay for it" I don't want to rationalize stuff, but I've just finished reading Locke's "Two Treatises on Government", one of the guys that started all this "the only true freedom is the protection of property"-thingie, and I just want to add that irrespective of the fact that one might agree or not with Locke's views you have to take into consideration that it has not always been like this (i.e. private property being "sacred" etc). In fact, Locke starts by arguing against people (Filmer and others) who were saying something of the like that the monarchs of the time had an irrevocable right to rule (and presumably to own everything under the skies), handed down (the right to rule) to them from generation to generation since Adam (the Genesis Adam). To say nothing of the 20th century madness that afflicted almost half of the known world, I'm talking about the Marxist/Leninist views on property. What I want to say is that what constitutes "property", "to own stuff" etc. has not always been "set in stone" as a "moral" thingie (whatever definition of "moral" you want to come up with). So people for whom piracy is "immoral" are taking a very short view of the whole thing, and possibly also deluding themselves into thinking that what is "moral" is almost by definition "immortal" and forever. They should take a more pragmatic view.

pfedor 14y ago
You could similarly defend any kind of stealing. The communists said "грабь награбленное", which means "steal what has been stolen". Here's the English-version of an article from The Great Soviet Encyclopedia: http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Expropriation+of+the+Expropriators http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Expropriation+of+... which advocates an equivalent of praptak's point of view applied to other kinds of property than the copyright.

jlgreco 14y ago

How is that so different from "I want to keep the rights to a cartoon I drew for ever and ever and ever.."?

MartinCron 14y ago
Of course it's not that different at all. Rationalizations happen on all sides. We're all guilty of them. I just think we should try to be honest with ourselves and each other.
- jlgreco 14y ago
  I don't see much advantage to doing the 'honorable' thing in the face of corporations that won't. If doing the right thing anyway is your cup of tea, then knock yourself out, but I'm really not interested in that.
- nitrogen 14y ago
  "Let's be honest" is just code for "you should feel guilty."
  - MartinCron 14y ago
    People who habitually rationalize self-serving behavior should feel guilty. That's what guilt is for.

guard-of-terra 14y ago

I have had a lot of stuff without paying for it (directly). Education, medical care, air even. What now?