Software which is used to distribute illegal material is, in and of itself, not illegal. If I sell drugs out of the back of my Ranger, it is relatively clear that this does not reflect on the Ranger. The Ranger is not the source of illegal activity. Likewise, gnutella, napster, macster, rapster, etc and on and on are not responsible for the material transported over them. In the end, people are responsible for their actions. The illegal acts are the posting of copyrighted material and the download of copyrighted material, whether done through old standards like ftp or gopher or new ones such as gnutella and napster.
If you wish to persecute illegal activity, you may do so. If you wish to censor software, you must find some justification for it. Since the software is not in violation of any laws of which I am aware, let's not pretend this is anything other than the censorship of source-code.
Assault rifles have a legitimate purpose: sport. There are laws banning certain types of firearms. These laws were passed by the Congress, and most have not been reviewed by the Supreme Court. However, the Supreme Court is the final authority on the legitimacy of these laws. I am sure, you will find, that these laws are subject to being overturned in due time.
I would like to see this case brought to the Supreme Court before I accept that this is justified censorship.
(If you analyze the ethics of distributing copyrighted mp3's, I can easily argue for the happiness of thousands versus the wealth of a single person. I do not believe in the inalienable right to make money.)
Slashdot Mirror
Software which is used to distribute illegal material is, in and of itself, not illegal. If I sell drugs out of the back of my Ranger, it is relatively clear that this does not reflect on the Ranger. The Ranger is not the source of illegal activity. Likewise, gnutella, napster, macster, rapster, etc and on and on are not responsible for the material transported over them. In the end, people are responsible for their actions. The illegal acts are the posting of copyrighted material and the download of copyrighted material, whether done through old standards like ftp or gopher or new ones such as gnutella and napster.
If you wish to persecute illegal activity, you may do so. If you wish to censor software, you must find some justification for it. Since the software is not in violation of any laws of which I am aware, let's not pretend this is anything other than the censorship of source-code.
Assault rifles have a legitimate purpose: sport. There are laws banning certain types of firearms. These laws were passed by the Congress, and most have not been reviewed by the Supreme Court. However, the Supreme Court is the final authority on the legitimacy of these laws. I am sure, you will find, that these laws are subject to being overturned in due time.
I would like to see this case brought to the Supreme Court before I accept that this is justified censorship.
(If you analyze the ethics of distributing copyrighted mp3's, I can easily argue for the happiness of thousands versus the wealth of a single person. I do not believe in the inalienable right to make money.)
In all things,
Madranis