[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 21, 1:45 pm, "ScottW" wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in ooglegroups.com...

On Oct 21, 1:05 pm, "ScottW" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote in message

I strongly disagree. I don't think it's ever the fault of those who own
something when it is stolen. I blame those who do the stealing.

You can say that...but regulatory groups find all the time against
companies and consortiums and industry groups for unfair trade
practices and illegal licensing practices.
Often the series of lawsuits that find the owner in violation are started
by
the owner trying to enforce his "rights".

Do you disagree that those who own a thing should determine if it's
given away for free or not?

To simplistic....when "or not" is too expensive then theft is often
ok'd by law. Happens in intellectual property all the time.
Is copyrighted art all that different?

So you apparently 'think' counterfeiting money is an acceptable
practice for those having a tough time earning money legally, as is
robbery.

Nope...courts have addressed that many times.

"IMO, music is too expensive. Therefore, theft is an
acceptable alternative."

Is it theft...or copyright violation?

If you download pirated music wothout paying the royalty, it is theft.
If you copy and distribute that material, it is copyright
infringement.

Was this supposed to be a trick question?

Are the penalties criminal or civil?

Criminal.

Situational ethics noted.

I have not advocated copyright violation.

Why am I thinking of Richard Nixon right now?

On the other hand, I don't know anyone who isn't guilty.

So that makes it 'right'.

Hm. How do I say this without using "big words"? LOL!

So what is 'ethical' to you changes, depending on how you feel about
something at a given moment. Further, if many people break a law, that
makes it "OK".

No one has ever given you a tape or CDR?

Sure they have. I accepted a CDR that violated copyright and included
material that may have been stolen. It was wrong of me to do so.

No...I guess it doesn't surprise me you have no friends.

The fact that they have, and that I accepted them, does not make it
"right".

If postings on You-tube are in violation of copyright laws
is Jenn's linking to them in violation?

I am not a lawyer. The link is a secondary consideration.

How about soliciting links to you tube videos?

The first question would be, "Is posting copyrighted material on
YouTube without permission a criminal violation of law?"

For you, I guess that depends on which way the wind is blowing.