4 ms·
The reason we don't "get" to ignore those monopolistic practices is the simple fact that it's a law -- which says nothing at all about whether it's right or wro
by apotheon 17y ago
The reason we don't "get" to ignore those monopolistic practices is the simple fact that it's a law -- which says nothing at all about whether it's right or wrong.
- tptacek 17y agoSo you're advocating simply ignoring the laws you don't approve of? Or of scolding the RIAA for demanding they be enforced? I don't get it. Nobody's saying the RIAA's business model is your fault. You are free to avoid the RIAA: don't use their offerings.
- kiba 17y agoNowhere does apotheon advocate the breaking of laws, just whether a law is right or wrong.
- tptacek 17y agoNowhere does apotheon actually advocate that copyright law is wrong, because that would be boring. Instead, he's set up a passive-aggressive straw man argument. Which is my point.
- apotheon 17y ago> Nowhere does apotheon actually advocate that copyright law is wrong Incorrect. Try following links once in a while. Do you expect me to say everything in one place? My god, all my opinions and explanations relevant to them in one place -- it would be a document fit to fill the Library of Congress. > Instead, he's set up a passive-aggressive straw man argument. The fact you are incapable of recognizing the implicit message in advocating for strict enforcement of copyright law is your failing -- not mine.
- randallsquared 17y agoSo you're advocating simply ignoring the laws you don't approve of? It seems arguable that this is a moral obligation. Going out of your way to comply with laws you disapprove of strengthens those laws you disapprove of -- it's self-contradictory. If you, in the course of going about your normal life, happen to comply because it's what you would do anyway, I don't think this means you have an obligation to break those laws, but ignoring them is probably best, unless it has other consequences you can't afford.
- apotheon 17y ago> So you're advocating simply ignoring the laws you don't approve of? Not as such. More to the point, I'm advocating phasing out those laws, regardless of whether anyone follows them while they're still on the books. People are already simply ignoring those laws, in ever-increasing numbers; nobody has to advocate for it. > You are free to avoid the RIAA: don't use their offerings. I don't.
- tptacek 17y agoIf you don't use RIAA offerings, why aren't you advocating that other people do likewise? That's Stallman's argument. I don't find it compelling, but at least it's intellectually valid. If you think that's the argument you are making, then where do business models come into the picture?
- apotheon 17y ago> If you don't use RIAA offerings, why aren't you advocating that other people do likewise? I do advocate that other people do likewise. The fact that I don't do so with every breath -- including the virtual "breaths" used to say what's in a particular piece of writing you happened to stumble across -- doesn't mean that I don't do so in general. > If you think that's the argument you are making, then where do business models come into the picture? Why are you trying to tell me I'm not allowed to have more than one argument?