Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 31st Aug 2010 22:09 UTC
Legal Despite doing what I think are some great things for the American people, the Obama administration has a dark side. Joe Biden and many others on staff come straight from the RIAA camp, and it shows. Today, the Obama administration disregarded every US law relating to theft and copyright by stating that piracy is "flat, unadulterated theft".
Permalink for comment 439087
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Regardless of the interesting topic of debating the fundamental differences between property theft and copyrights....

Why do we NOT see articles on OSnews and others about how many people do NOT see a problem with the copying and (notably) distributing of copyrighted works?

I mean... would we even have to discuss the differences between theft and copyright if people were doing the right thing with regards to copyright holders?

I don't think anyone has a moral right to make a living by restricting the liberty of others.

Just something to think about... "Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you."

Didn't work very well for Socrates. I think sometimes we need to exercise our democratic rights to change unjust laws.

As a teacher, I have done random surveys (nothing official, just raising of hands, etc.) and even in our most "moral" and "conservative" institutions the violation of copyrights is VERY high (>75% of students in Junior High and High School).

The Internet makes is easy... and unfortunately, it has made many of us into abusers.

The situation has changed considerably since copyright law was first introduced. Initially, copyright only applied to books, and printing books required the time-consuming process of setting up a printing press. Thus, copyright law only restricted commercial public distribution. Nowadays the restriction on copying has become a restriction on personal liberty.

How many of these people steal? (I mean actually steal.) Much fewer? Perhaps it is because they can tell the difference between something that is inherently immoral, and something that is a societal convention?

No... I don't like it that I'm NOT allowed to make personal copies of media like DVDs. I do not like DRM and how it prevents me from making copies.... (though there are illegal mechanisms). And so... I don't like "the man" for putting a heavy weight on my shoulders because "the kid" down the street is distributing 50,000 songs, 400 DVDs and 1000 pieces of commercial software illegally ("kid" believes it's ok because he/she is NOT charging for the "service").

Sometimes we LOSE our freedoms universally due to the irresponsible behavior of a few. This is sad. But again, what I used to see as a "few" is a rapidly growing segment (from my unscientific surveys).

It is sad when people's liberty is lost, and I think we ought to have good reasons whenever we do this.

As a parent, I have taught my daughter that downloading copyrighted material that she does not have the rights to obtain or own is wrong. But somehow, I do not think you'll see a single article on OSnews even suggesting that it is wrong.... perhaps the "rapidly growing segment" has already grown to consume OSnews as well??

Out of interest, if your daughter did download copyrighted material from the Internet (and assuming copyright law to be just) how much harm do you think she would actually cause to copyright holders?

Reply Parent Score: 2