Linux group rebuffs movie piracy charge

TalkBack 9 of 14:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Red Herrings abound

NZ:Fact 1: People hate DRM (and I don't really blame them, it is a pain in the butt).

True

NZ:Fact 2: MOST people believe that criminals should be stopped from committing crimes. Of course criminals think they should be able to get away with murder, but decent people would never defend a criminal's actions.

Most people, I'd like to think, at least, believe criminals should be PUNISHED for committing crimes (although I personally define a crime as harming someone or their property, I know that's not the majority definition). Intent is a much hazier area, but you were a bit vague in the statement.

NZ:Fact 3: Stealing movies or music because you think that CDs or DVDs are overpriced or CEOs make too much money isn't even close to an adequate excuse. Come on people, it isn't exactly like we are talking about a starving family stealing cabbages from your backyard so they can live another day. It is entertainment! That, and tons of music is legally available for free anyway on the radio and movies are available on TV so you can't even say "well, if I didn't steal the music, I'd have none to listen to." So, people who use that as an excuse are simply trying to justify their morally reprehensible behaviour.

True, granted, and agreed. However, because language is important if you want to communicate your ideas as you mean them, you should use the proper words. What is being referred to is 'copyright infringement', not 'theft'. Might be a minor difference semantically, but if you wish to debate you have to be utilizing the proper names for the subject of the debate. All part of communication, you see.

Regardless of my agreement, those facts are nothing but a straw man, or better yet a red herring. Unless you're saying that better 5 (random number) innocents get caught with the guilty, you are defending their efforts while IGNORING what the story is about. The story is not about the gleeful opponents of the RIAA laughing because they said this would happen in the first place (obviously correctly). The story is that they are NOT simply scanning, they are accusing INNOCENT people/groups of infringing.

When you consider it okay for YOU personally to be accused of rape although innocent(to use No_Axe's common analogy), because that means they are really coming down on a horrible crime, then you might be able to make that claim without any hypocrisy.

The story, once again, is NOT that they are searching for infringers. The story is that they DO NOT VERIFY people are infringers before they issue their subpoenae/lawsuits/accusations. Did you REALLY intend to say that you support RIAA in issuing fraudulent notices of copyright infringements simply because SOMEONE is infringing their copyright? Are YOU, NonZealot, (a purported non-infringer) willing and ready to recieve a subpoena/court summons/lawsuit simply because you were connected to a program distributing YOUR OWN SOFTWARE?

Posted by: quietkey   Posted on: 09/20/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• ChangeAuditor for Exchange ScriptLogic Quest ChangeAuditor for Exchange proactively audits all activity, provides ... Download Now
• MICROSOFT SHAREPOINT: NEW USE, SECURITY RISKS AND BEST PRACTICES Trend Micro Web 2.0 technologies are transforming business and many believe that ... Download Now
• Email Security and Archiving - Clearer in the Cloud Google Join the cloud computing revolution and discover why it's a better, more cost-effetive option for handling your email security and archiving needs. (Sponsored by Google) Download Now