Linked by David Adams on Tue 26th Oct 2004 16:30 UTC
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Well, then we have different attitudes, and therefore, it is useless to dicuss this subject with you
.
But seriously, for me it's rather simple. It used to be:
Person wants album A. Person goes to shop. Person pays X dollars. Artist/shop/record company/all others involved get X dollars.
Now it's:
Person wants album A. Person fires up P2P. Person pays 0 dollars. Artist/shop/record company/all others involved get 0 dollars.
That's deriving people of income, so it's stealing. It might be a different way of stealing than walking into a shop and get stuff without paying, but it still is stealing. Not paying for something is also stelaing. By not paying your taxes, you steal from the government, for instance. Whether you agree with the way they spend it or not.