There is responsibility for actions (it's up in the air about the intelligence part). It will come, but the result may not be reaped in our lifetimes. Nevertheless, why does personal responsibility matter in this case? It's not harming anyone.
To continue the book analogy to digital files, it would be necessary to require exclusive sharing. When you loan a book, that you bought, to someone else, it is not possible for you to read it while they are reading it. But when you share a song from a CD that you bought, it is possible for you to listen to your copy while others listen to a copy of your copy. Thus, "loaning" a book is not the same as "sharing" a digital music collection, unless there is some exclusivity mechanism that ensures only X number of copies are available.
Then in that case, it is like putting a book next to a photocopier. But a blanket statement, "it's like putting a book next to a photocopier" is incorrect.
However, the initial metaphor by geekoid required that you don't have permission to distribute. The only case where you have the original media and have permission to distribute is when you created the content. In all other cases, whether permission to distribute is granted or not, it is not the original media.
Actually it's more like you putting a book next to a photocopier.
Incorrect. In the case of music being shared, a copy of the original media has already been made and that copy is placed in a location freely accessible to others. So the first metaphor is correct. The book (the original media) was copied and placed in a shared area for freely available distribution.
Slashdot Mirror
There is responsibility for actions (it's up in the air about the intelligence part). It will come, but the result may not be reaped in our lifetimes. Nevertheless, why does personal responsibility matter in this case? It's not harming anyone.
To continue the book analogy to digital files, it would be necessary to require exclusive sharing. When you loan a book, that you bought, to someone else, it is not possible for you to read it while they are reading it. But when you share a song from a CD that you bought, it is possible for you to listen to your copy while others listen to a copy of your copy. Thus, "loaning" a book is not the same as "sharing" a digital music collection, unless there is some exclusivity mechanism that ensures only X number of copies are available.
Then in that case, it is like putting a book next to a photocopier. But a blanket statement, "it's like putting a book next to a photocopier" is incorrect.
However, the initial metaphor by geekoid required that you don't have permission to distribute. The only case where you have the original media and have permission to distribute is when you created the content. In all other cases, whether permission to distribute is granted or not, it is not the original media.
Actually it's more like you putting a book next to a photocopier.
Incorrect. In the case of music being shared, a copy of the original media has already been made and that copy is placed in a location freely accessible to others. So the first metaphor is correct. The book (the original media) was copied and placed in a shared area for freely available distribution.