Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dr. Harry" data-source="post: 1558462" data-attributes="member: 5468">Now, here at least we can possibly clear up one source of confusion.  Later in the post that I am responding to, you said "I did not say any such thing.  I didn't put words in your mouth to argue against, so please don't do the same to me." Your accusation that I was putting words in your mouth was from my response which could be read to imply that your perceived position was that piracy:1. should happen    This is what I got from your declaration that piracy was just the free     market system at work.2. should be encouraged    This one might perhaps be an over-extension of your endorsement of the    practice.3.  should be accepted   Are you not saying this?4. that you claim that no harm is done by piracy.   I might be inaccurate here; it might as easily be your position that there  is harm done, but that is not enough of a reason for you not to do it.  In fact, your moral compass in this matter (from the quote above) seems to be that piracy is acceptable (that you have nothing to rationalize) if you're not likely to be caught.  It's acceptable if you're not likely to be caught.  This represents a fundamental difference in philosphy between us, although this would not be nearly as interesting or fecund as an area for discussion as the difference (if I understand the difference correctly) between The Sigil and myself about where the most basic rights are based in the creator/social relationship.   I would say that this is an extension of the two incentives I mentioned, as the illegal downloading became so common as to make those involved feel that they were completely safe from prosecution for their crime.  I grant that the perceived safety was strongly enhanced by the time that people were able to download without consequences.  I am not convinced of this, but that does not mean that the effort should not be made.  The perceived cost difference might be an excuse for the downloader to try and make their stealing "noble" -- Ooh, I'm like Robin Hood -- but I still hold that it is:1. The ease of the act2. The perception that there will be no prosecution for the act.  that makes it likely.  If game hardcovers cost $1.00, then I predict that the excuse would be "Well, they're not losing very much to me."   My point is that it is already illegal, and that if you don't feel that there is anything wrong with that won't mean a whit if you ever get called on it.  If enough people choose file-sharing over purchase, there won't be any new material to steal.</blockquote>

Verification