"Well yes, if your employer asks you to do something immoral or just plain wrong then you don't do it - seems simple enough to me...
Too black and white. What if doing so means losing her house, blacklisting by the school board and her children going hungry? Did the student who complained of this offer to fight the schoolboard to keep the book on the curriculum, or was it the teacher's sole burden to bear while they stood aside with nothing to lose but the inconvenience of a library trip or $5 at the bookstore? I don't see a lot of difference between the moral simplicity discussed here and that which results in banned books.
That was 400 years ago, the descendants of early settlers are a tiny minority of the population, those "fanatical Christian sects" were in fact fleeing religious fanaticism and they established the most anti-religious government of their times. I think the answer lies elsewhere.
There was a time this was refered to as A Society, but Society became passe about the time Carter got the boot. Now it's all about 'me', and none typify this better than entertainment content distributors.
"The only English word that comes close to fitting is Steal."
Never heard of Copy? It's the basis of the word Copyright. Apply that to your sculptor's example. You're begging the question by claiming Steal is the only applicable word. True, copying is currently against the law, but those laws were lobbied for over decades (read Bought) by corporate interests, not generally the artist, begging the question again with the sculptor's example. More correct would have been using an art dealer as an example. Finally, you imply all laws all equally just, stand on some moral high ground for having been passed by a political body and only unquestioning obedience is moral. Back of the bus anyone? Though stern and clear you're viewpoint is way too simplistic.
"It's not really doing anything the swivel-eyed idealists said P2P would do, because it's not designed to."
That puts them on equal footing with the RIAA then because, other than unsubstantiated Chicken Little proclamations, harm from file sharing has never been conclusively established. Trending sales against sharing suggests the opposite, RIAA members were having banner years when Napster was at its peak. These legislative acts and prosecutions aren't doing anything the "swivel-eyed" lawyers running the RIAA claim they're designed to do.
Thanks for the explanation, but my nature when it comes to pain and trouble of a Stage 2 Gentoo build is once (or in this case repeatedly) bitten twice shy, especially with at least two alternatives proven to run solidly for me. The XFS soft-RAID stripe on my server has seen power go down many times without incident, that reiserfs install corrupted system files every lockup. Maybe ReiserFS 5 or 6. Or 7.;)
Just beating the other end of it. Only fair, for years though all the pre-1.0 versions all we heard here was how the browser wars were over and Moz would never approach the quality of IE. Thankfully the later proved true.
ReiserFS 3 wasn't too solid when Nvidia drivers locked my machine up exiting X-windows to a shell. It blew out my XFCe config files every time I shut down. Can't speak for 4 but I'm in no rush to try ReiserFS again for a very, very long time. XFS never did this to me.
Ironic, I just finished watching an excerpt from a Michael Moore interview where he supports your right and encourages you to download and watch his movies for free, provided you don't try to re-sell or otherwise profit from his works (and by 'profit' he doesn't mean the twisted form 'saved money' so often heard here as a defense of IP prosecution.) His reasoning? He makes films to make people think, the more who hear and consider his view the better.
I don't know why you were down-modded, but you raise an excellent point. If the BSD license is so much more advantageous, then why do we have three incompatible 'BSDs totaling a small percentage the market penetration of Linux? They've all been around a comparable period of time. (BTW, I really like and use FreeBSD. This is about licenses.)
"The article seems to suggest that this will make insurance cheaper."
When I moved to an area where insurance is cheaper, from the high-traffic centre of town to a community ten minutes outside the city limits but still less than a twenty from work, my insurance went up because I was driving further. When I later moved back into town, it went up again because, although my drive was now five minutes, traffic is higher in town. Is this the kind of "cheaper" they mean? It usually is.
"Right and wrong" and "legality" are two different things, that's why we have terms like "unjust law". The RIAA bought the body of Bono/Hatch legislation discussed here. Always bear that distinction in mind.
The radio station serving Whistler BC, home of the next Winter Olympic games, isnt allowed to use the term '2010' in any sense that makes reference to the event other than in news reports. And some here joked that the current IP madness would result in corporate control of numbers and letters.
Slashdot Mirror
Too black and white. What if doing so means losing her house, blacklisting by the school board and her children going hungry? Did the student who complained of this offer to fight the schoolboard to keep the book on the curriculum, or was it the teacher's sole burden to bear while they stood aside with nothing to lose but the inconvenience of a library trip or $5 at the bookstore? I don't see a lot of difference between the moral simplicity discussed here and that which results in banned books.
That was 400 years ago, the descendants of early settlers are a tiny minority of the population, those "fanatical Christian sects" were in fact fleeing religious fanaticism and they established the most anti-religious government of their times. I think the answer lies elsewhere.
There was a time this was refered to as A Society, but Society became passe about the time Carter got the boot. Now it's all about 'me', and none typify this better than entertainment content distributors.
Content producers might be, artists never will.
I'm confused, in your example is the dog the RIAA?
Explain your +5 moderation then.
Copy != Take. Not in any form of English outside of RIAA double-speak. And, nothing personal, that +5 moderation is pure astroturf.
Do you even read this forum? Look up, there are probably as many +5 Insightful posts reaming the file sharers as supporting them.
Never heard of Copy? It's the basis of the word Copyright. Apply that to your sculptor's example. You're begging the question by claiming Steal is the only applicable word. True, copying is currently against the law, but those laws were lobbied for over decades (read Bought) by corporate interests, not generally the artist, begging the question again with the sculptor's example. More correct would have been using an art dealer as an example. Finally, you imply all laws all equally just, stand on some moral high ground for having been passed by a political body and only unquestioning obedience is moral. Back of the bus anyone? Though stern and clear you're viewpoint is way too simplistic.
That puts them on equal footing with the RIAA then because, other than unsubstantiated Chicken Little proclamations, harm from file sharing has never been conclusively established. Trending sales against sharing suggests the opposite, RIAA members were having banner years when Napster was at its peak. These legislative acts and prosecutions aren't doing anything the "swivel-eyed" lawyers running the RIAA claim they're designed to do.
"With most U.S. independent films, the producer sells the right to distribute his film in the U.S. at a loss to a distributer like Sony...
to
"Thus, if you buy a region free DVD player, you're stealing from the producer, not the big bad distributer ...."?
Seems to me enforcing a system where the independent film maker sells American distribution rights at a loss it's Sony who's doing the stealing.
You mean we'll finally see damages proved to a standard suitable for a court of law instead of braying repetition by 'news media' such as Yahoo?
Thanks for the explanation, but my nature when it comes to pain and trouble of a Stage 2 Gentoo build is once (or in this case repeatedly) bitten twice shy, especially with at least two alternatives proven to run solidly for me. The XFS soft-RAID stripe on my server has seen power go down many times without incident, that reiserfs install corrupted system files every lockup. Maybe ReiserFS 5 or 6. Or 7. ;)
True, the rest just have Internet connections .
Just beating the other end of it. Only fair, for years though all the pre-1.0 versions all we heard here was how the browser wars were over and Moz would never approach the quality of IE. Thankfully the later proved true.
ReiserFS 3 wasn't too solid when Nvidia drivers locked my machine up exiting X-windows to a shell. It blew out my XFCe config files every time I shut down. Can't speak for 4 but I'm in no rush to try ReiserFS again for a very, very long time. XFS never did this to me.
Ironic, I just finished watching an excerpt from a Michael Moore interview where he supports your right and encourages you to download and watch his movies for free, provided you don't try to re-sell or otherwise profit from his works (and by 'profit' he doesn't mean the twisted form 'saved money' so often heard here as a defense of IP prosecution.) His reasoning? He makes films to make people think, the more who hear and consider his view the better.
I don't know why you were down-modded, but you raise an excellent point. If the BSD license is so much more advantageous, then why do we have three incompatible 'BSDs totaling a small percentage the market penetration of Linux? They've all been around a comparable period of time. (BTW, I really like and use FreeBSD. This is about licenses.)
For so many who post here 'freedom' is primarily synonymous with 'freedom to make money'. The rest they mistakenly take for granted.
When I moved to an area where insurance is cheaper, from the high-traffic centre of town to a community ten minutes outside the city limits but still less than a twenty from work, my insurance went up because I was driving further. When I later moved back into town, it went up again because, although my drive was now five minutes, traffic is higher in town. Is this the kind of "cheaper" they mean? It usually is.
"Right and wrong" and "legality" are two different things, that's why we have terms like "unjust law". The RIAA bought the body of Bono/Hatch legislation discussed here. Always bear that distinction in mind.
The radio station serving Whistler BC, home of the next Winter Olympic games, isnt allowed to use the term '2010' in any sense that makes reference to the event other than in news reports. And some here joked that the current IP madness would result in corporate control of numbers and letters.
Any 2014 alarm clock that woke me up four hours early for work would quickly feel the wrath of my 2014 Death Ray.
emerge kde, swaret kde, yum kde, apt-get kde....zzzzzzzz
You forgot "most recent" ahead of "excuse".