and on a wholly different note

[nyarhotep]

¿could someone explain to my Capitalistic, Luddite ass the morality behind file-sharing copywritten material? the three answers i've heard are: Corporations are evil and kick puppies, therefore i'm justified in ripping them off; copywriting "information" is ludicrous on its face, my actions aren't illegal they're progressive; i don't give a crap,

Comments

[arghreality]

I would also advise forgetting morality when dealing with systems and not individuals. Systems self-right themselves, and while individuals are located within the system - including some at the 'bottom' which are your trump card in this case - these individuals are also placed 'within' a number of other systems in which they have a huge amount of potential

[ladysilverlark]

As for your comment on the more jobs in the west most low income factory workers can't relocate their families or themselves to go to that job cause it won't cover the moving expenses

[arghreality]

It's true that there are many hardships associated with poverty, but it's my own recent experiences with this area that made me say what I said - I myself have been jobless for a fairly long time, and a big portion of this time I wasn't able to get welfare - a big segment of my friends have also been in this position

real commandos wear kilts

[nyarhotep]

yes, i agree. systems are complex and indeterminate. simplifying the relationship down to, "file-sharing--->starving families" is sophistry at best, villainy at worse

however, i'd posit morals and ethics are, eventually, based on personal relationships. the Geneva Conventions of Warfare are designed to deal with the entire system that is modern warfare, however they're eventually focused on the individual. on a purely system basis, biological warfare is quite effective and, if taken in the long view, might preserve lives (assuming we believe the rational behind the local genocide at Hiroshima and Nagasaki). however, such devices are outlawed because they're immoral on a personal level - they don't take personal distinctions into account. we have to take individuals into account when dealing with a system, otherwise we lose purpose and meaning, the whole becomes paramount to the unit

[samwize]

If you have a loaf of bread, and I take it from you, and give it to my friend, at the end of that, my friend has bread. If you have a DVD, and I rip it, and burn it for my friend, at the end of that all three of us have the DVD

maybe i'm just knee-jerking

[nyarhotep]

it seems to me, a CD/DVD is a very real, tangible object which can quantified and sold. what rippers are doing is breaking the contents away from the container and using the change in mode as a release from culpability. if you tap into a TV-cable and 'steal' channels, it's theft; if you bypass routing station controls and 'steal' electricity or water or bandwidth or what have you, it's theft. if you remove the contents of a container or storage medium and send it on without paying for it, it's theft. so, ¿is the only difference between them and music the copying element

Re: maybe i'm just knee-jerking

[samwize]

A DVD is NOT a "container" for a movie. Any more than a book is a container for a story. If I read you the book, I haven't seperated it from the container. If I rip a movie from a DVD _it's still on the DVD_. If I take electricity, then yes, that's theft: no one else can take it after I did. If I take a cable channel, then who specifically am I harming? Can you point to anyone at all who is deprived of something measurable? Saying "Well, obviously, the money they could've gotten from you if you weren't taking it". Except that presumes I'd _want_ to buy those channels. Hell, it's not like you can actaully order what you want anyways