r0cken, you seem awfully dismissive of every argument that suggests buying music is the perhaps more moral than stealing as much of it as you can.
It is more moral buying it, of course. The artist should be paid.
What I'm saying is that there's a lot more to it, than the one-dimensional "downloading is stealing" argument. Dismissing the economic issue for a moment, one could say that there are different degrees of moral, and definitely different degrees of illegal. Stealing a chewing gum is different from robbing a bank, is different from downloading a song. Some would say that stealing is stealing is stealing, but even the law wouldn't agree with you.
And then, you could see downloading an album as copying it from a friend. Legal? Moral? You'd get different answers at different times and places. See, for example the "Audio Home Recording Act" of 1992 (lots have changed since then, I know).
Yeah, I know. I realize that the internet music culture has found all and every reason to act like downloading music isn't really that immoral or illegal. But, in most cases, they're wrong, and just trying to justify (imo) a lazy and greedy habit.
r0cken, you seem awfully dismissive of every argument that suggests buying music is the perhaps more moral than stealing as much of it as you can.
Related story.
My dad got the new Led Zeppelin Celebration Day CD/DVD set. I asked him if I could borrow it. I took the CD's up to my room and ripped them to my computer. I then put the physical CD's back in the case and gave them back to my dad.
He was happy to have his CD's back. But I know that I stole from him, and the pain burns deep in my heart.
IIRC, that's neither illegal nor immoral.
I'm amazed that there was no further follow-up to this, so I guess I'll do it.
In the first block, downloading is immoral and illegal, and people who do it are lazy and greedy.
In the second block, someone has made a complete rip of an entire CD/DVD set, but that's neither illegal nor immoral.
They're the same thing.In each scenario, a copy has been made of copyrighted material for the use of the person who made the copy. If you download music or video, you're making yourself a copy. If you rip someone's discs, you're making yourself a copy. In neither case did you pay for it.
The only difference I can see is one of scale. The files up on the Internet are there for anyone to grab; obviously that's over the line. But copying your dad's discs is the same thing. Suppose Dad has five kids and each one makes a copy. Is that still okay? Then he takes them to work and passes the discs around the office and everyone at work makes a copy. Has he crossed the line yet? Oh, what the heck, why not just upload the files to some site so anyone who wants a copy can just grab. It's easier and this is good stuff that should be shared, right?
Topic: General musings about pirating (Read 5887 times)
