Donovan Rebbechi wrote in
:

OK, but I'd say that if law is the basis for determining morality in
any way, then it's only fair to use the language of the law in the
appraisal of ones morality. The law does not say that you've committed
theft (it doesn't even come close to saying it), it says that you've
violated the DMCA.

The argument is whether violating they DCMA can ever be called "theft",
and whether that theft is immoral. Whatever the language the law uses,
it seems reasonable to use the common definition of "theft" to decide
whether it's applicable in this case.

In this case, the violations of the DCMA reduce the amount of money the
music producers can make either now or in the future.

Here is where I have a problem with this: there are a lot of actions
that reduce the amount of money you can make (now or in future). These
include antitrust violations, securities fraud, insider trading, illegal
business practices by a competitor, contractual breaches (which are very
similar to many technical license violations) and libel. Some of these
aren't even criminal offences. I wouldn't refer to any of these as theft
(would you ?)

I think it's misleading to use "theft" to describe anything that
interferes with ones ability to make income. There are many things, both
legal and illegal that hurt ones ability to make income.

The word "theft", even in the common sense, would seem to imply a fairly
direct and quantifiable financial impact on the victim. In the case of
simply piracy, one can say that they copied a product that they're
legally required to pay $X- for. This is analogous to a theft of
service. At worst, the illegitimate transfer of media is analogous to a
terms of service violation.


I agree with your last statement: "theft" implies a fairly direct and
quantifiable financial impact. When you copy a book that's for sale and
give it to someone else, the loss to the author is clear. When you copy
music into another form, instead of buying the CD in addition to the tape,
the loss is direct and clear. In both cases the "taking" is of an
intangible but I think it's justified to use "theft" to describe it.

I'm done. This horse isn't just dead, it's flayed, chopped, hashed, and
we're all standing around with horseflesh up our nostrils.

Hugh


--
Help! My myofibrillar material is disorganized!