Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 27th Nov 2010 10:46 UTC
Legal The US is really ramping up its war on intellectual property infringement, a war which I'm sure will be just as successful, cheap and supported by the people as the wars on drugs and terrorism. The US has started seizing the domain names of various websites through ICANN - not because owners of these sites were convicted of anything, but merely because complaints have been filed against them. Anyone want to take a guess how long it will be before the US government blocks WikiLeaks? Update: The blocks function outside of the US too. In other words, the US is forcing its views upon the rest of the world once again.
Thread beginning with comment 451305
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Correction
by FrankenFuss on Sat 27th Nov 2010 15:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Correction"
Member since:

I completely agree with you. It's amazing how people here will defend to the death their alleged inalienable right to STEAL. Now, of course, you have the Black Helicopter Gang saying, " WikiLeaks is next..." and other nonsense, completely ignoring the fact that copyright infringement is not the same as free speech issues. If they were, WikiLeaks and jihadist websites would have been blocked already.

So...why throw up these canards about WikiLeaks, free speech, etc...? How else can they rationalize their thievery.

Edited 2010-11-27 15:13 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[4]: Correction
by ricegf on Sat 27th Nov 2010 15:34 in reply to "RE[3]: Correction"
ricegf Member since:

In criminal law, "theft" is defined as "the dishonest taking of property belonging to another person with the intention of depriving the owner permanently of its possession" (free dictionary) and "the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it" (Webster's).

This just doesn't sound like what's happening here; Big Media is not being deprived of any personal property a'tall. IANAL, but I believe you meant to criticize "copyright infringement", which is a very different thing.

Copyright (in the USA) is a privilege granted to an author by constitutional authority for a limited time for the explicit purpose of promoting science and the useful arts. Property rights, by contrast, are considered God-given and inalienable and cannot be legally removed except by due process under the law; they never expire (for example).

Copyright infringement is still wrong, of course, but it isn't theft, no matter how many times Big Media repeats the big lie. And yes, the difference matters - if copyrighted material is "property" and violating copyright is "theft", then control of the material can only be removed after due process - which is, of course, the goal of Big Media. Tried watching "Steamboat Willie" lately? ;-)

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE[5]: Correction
by MollyC on Sun 28th Nov 2010 02:45 in reply to "RE[4]: Correction"
MollyC Member since:

Frankenfuss is using the term "steal", colloquially. Steal means more than your legal definition of "theft" as it is used in common language. For example, the term "stealing cable" has been widely accepted to mean the act of getting cable TV signals for free without authorization.

Anyway, when people get hung up over the word "steal" when it comes to piracy, I at times will use the word "cheat" instead. Pirates of IP are cheating the creators out of rightful payment, just like one who sneaks into a movie theater to watch a movie for free is cheating the movie theater out of rightful payment.

So I will alter Frankenfuss's original post, thusly:
It's amazing how people here will defend to the death their alleged inalienable right to CHEAT others.

People don't like to be cheated any more than they like to be stolen from. And cheating can be worse than stealing; it depends on the nature of the cheating.

Reply Parent Score: 3