[Stoner]

Originally Posted by iltos

i read it all down to here.....and find no huge difference in our pov.....your's (typically) is just more well thought out
wrt to what you infer is my condoning the rationalization of breaking the law, the very fact that you agree that the biz model is outdated is itself an arguement for the illegal behavior.

and on that, we stand in two different places....

here you seem to be ok with the possibility that what's needed is just a new layer of technology plastered over the existing business model, to protect it's interests....i know you to be a firm believer in the premises of society, and in the idea that the existing legal structure is meant to support those premises....it's why i attempted to take a deeper look at the idea of rationalizing illegality in this context.

consider.....there are plenty of people who pay a monthly fee for cable tv access and an additional couple of bucks for a machine that will let them download series and movies for free, so they can watch them at their leisure.

if i pay a monthly fee for access to the internet, and i have a machine that will allow me to download stuff off of it.....the legal difference, imo, is in the perception of the different corporations involved, not the mind of the end user....some result of contractual negotiations and technological innovation.

is cable tv considered to own the information and entertainment transmitted by their networks?.....how is it that they can legally claim control of the same content that verizon, for example, provides through its network....and that it's legal to take it from cable tv, but illegal to take from verizon?

this was a part of the arguement verizon was using in it's "tier user" idea for dsl access, as well as it being used in those FCC hearings where verizon argued for ownership of its network...and by implication, the content it provided.

if they can make that arguement successfully, then they have the right to block all p2p sites because of the risk of illegal downloads.....

is this a new business model you would condone?
it's one corporate solution that would solve the problem....and all it would take is a tweak of the current definitions within the legal system



the big rationalization that i see is that the existing corporate business model operates on the premise that it controls all product preparation and output....from the contract that musicians sign, to the packaging of both the artist and the music....and the arguement is that since that's the way it is, that's the way it must remain.

kid rock's amusing, but misguided, humor aside (he didn't advocate going into tower records and stealing CDs.....nor stealing the production drawings of a new lexus and building one yourself), this boils down to protecting your investment.....and the business model that has served the industry since somebody heard the grateful dead in golden gate park and realized the potential market for their music.

wrt to what you infer is my condoning the rationalization of breaking the law, the very fact that you agree that the biz model is outdated is itself an arguement for the illegal behavior.

Sincerely...I see no logic to that.
A poor business model is merely one that returns less value at greater effort.
Crime is an element that molests a poor business model, perhaps even attracts the problem by the nature of it's weakness.....but being a poor business model is not justification for the crime that infests it.

the big rationalization that i see is that the existing corporate business model operates on the premise that it controls all product preparation and output

Well, forget size.....aren't all business models oriented towards controlling 'preparation and output'?
It's the efficiency that determines success.

BTW.....the posts are drifting way from the threads intent. Pointing out bogus rationalizations for stealing....in this case......by piracy and illegal file sharing.
Proving a business model is inept does not negate the social implications of accepting crime just because 'we' can get away with it.
A poor business model does not rationalize piracy and stealing.
It's just easier

[thingamajig]

Originally Posted by Stoner

Why should a developer be made to suffer any further consequences beyond the criminal act? His business stands to prosper or suffer on it's own merits....irrelevant to this thread.

Well, I didn't say that by putting their software learning tools out of reach of students is a crime. I agree with the part in bold. It's relevance is precisely what you are looking for - how some rationalize piracy.

Originally Posted by Stoner

I haven't proposed any model for correction.

Fair enough. So it's more of a moral issue then. But also one that points to the fact that business models will change. They are changing.

Originally Posted by Stoner

Go back and read the thread for the first time .............

No way I'll try to untie your knots and you can't make me!

[iltos]

Originally Posted by Stoner

BTW.....the posts are drifting way from the threads intent. Pointing out bogus rationalizations for stealing....in this case......by piracy and illegal file sharing.

hey....wait a minute!!....you spent a whole bunch of time itemizing all my rationalizations, Jack
so i've been giving you LOTS to point out

Proving a business model is inept does not negate the social implications of accepting crime just because 'we' can get away with it.

nope...it sure doesn't.....
but i do believe the social implications of this phenomena run deeper than just "accepting crime"

It's just easier

not with you, my friend.....not with you

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by thingamajig

Well, I didn't say that by putting their software learning tools out of reach of students is a crime. I agree with the part in bold. It's relevance is precisely what you are looking for - how some rationalize piracy.



Fair enough. So it's more of a moral issue then. But also one that points to the fact that business models will change. They are changing.



No way I'll try to untie your knots and you can't make me!

What happened is that a certain poster was copy and pasting 'news' articles in Tech Related News forum ( often bloggers ) that collectively were advocating piracy and illegal file sharing, both from with in business models and on the out side as a receiver.
While discussion was allowed, it would almost instantly take on aspects of debate. Since that forum wasn't allowing debate, my only option was to drag those posts into Civ Debate and present my views.

I even started a thread in the suggestions forum about the issue.
Here:
http://forums.techguy.org/site-comme...o-illegal.html