On Wednesday 18 July 2007, tedd wrote: > >There is no such thing as copyright theft. There is such a thing as > >copyright infringement. > > No one is saying otherwise. Except you. > I don't care what you call it, taking something that is not yours is > stealing. False. > If an employer hires you to do a job, receives and uses > your code, and doesn't pay you for it, then that's stealing. It > doesn't make much difference if you call it breach of contract, > copyright infringement, fraud, or theft -- it's still illegal. True. > And, > I've spent enough time in court to know the difference. Apparently not. > I am always surprised as to how simple wrongful acts can be > diminished with spin. We live in a world of political correctness, to > which we all object, but whenever we can, we add our own spin to the > layers of complexities around us. And here is the crux of the point that I've been making. Information is not property. Property cannot be duplicated ad infinitim. Information can, by its very nature. The concept of "theft" does not apply. The concept of restricting the flow of information is artificial (to answer someone else's question from earlier), whereas the laws of physics provide a natural restriction on the flow of goods. You are the one buying into the "spin" by claiming that information is as permanently and inviolately restricted as atoms and molecules are. That is false. That does not make breaking the law "right", but it is a necessary fact of nature to understand if you want to understand the law and why the law exists (in theory). Of course, the media moguls have spent decades selling that spin precisely because they want to confuse the issue. If you convince people that information is "property" in the same way that their house or car is, then you undermine the purpose of copyright (promoting social good, not private profit), undermine any attempts to reform the law, and undermine the basic precepts of both open source software (the free flow of information creates better expressive works through sharing) and Free software (restriction of the free flow of information is immoral). Is murder "theft"? Of course not, but it's still illegal. Is rape "theft"? Of course not, but it's still illegal. Is arson "theft"? Of course not, but it's still illegal. Is jaywalking "theft"? Of course not, but it's still illegal. Is speeding "theft"? Of course not, but it's still illegal. Is copyright infringement "theft"? Of course not, but it's still illegal. Copyright infringement is no more "theft" than walking against the light is "speeding". > I, for one, just call theft what it is. And everything else that is illegal too, apparently, regardless of whether or not it is. -- Larry Garfield AIM: LOLG42 larry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ICQ: 6817012 "If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it." -- Thomas Jefferson -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
