Quote:
|
Originally Posted by weishaupt1776
taking someone elses stuff and distributing without the creator's consent is theft - that is a violation of God's law
also, you may be violating the 2nd commandment by making a God to suit yourself ( i.e. "My God" thinks that uploading someone else's property w/o their consent isn't theft)
|
private property is imaginary. Its just an emotional projection, a sort of selfishness, trying to impute some special character to bits and pieces of the universe. In this sense, private property is merely a social construct.
This is different from priority of use, possession, enjoyment, etc. How does making a copy of this book disrupt anyone's priority? They still have their copies just the same.
put it this way- 'no harm, no foul'. What harm is there in making a copy of some information and putting it on the web? None that I can see.
In law, a crime is measured by the damage it does- "theft under 1000, grand theft, etc". What is the "fair-market value" of the
loss to Bork or whoever?
Remember, mere benefit on one part is not automatically equal to another's loss.
People need to stop trying to "sell" everything- pay it forward instead. If this approach to status is valid then there should be some attendant material benefits that allow one to be philanthropic with the info. Nobless Oblige, and all that.
Any contract that promises to do the impossible is void, or that part is. Besides, I can always make copies for my own use, I can lend the book , I can lend copies...I understand it perjures the conscience to break the given word (the copyright), but it was a stupid clause to begin with. The author shouldn't put anyone in this position.
