Quote:
Originally posted by wst3
Man I hate it when this happens, but I guess I gotta answer this one<G>...
I repeatedly asked you how you could justify theft and you answered with additional accusations of ant-innovation and anti-americanism... which certainly appears to be justifying Napster, and therefore theft via Napster.
I'm not even sure if Napster is a symptom of a top-heavy, greedy, etc business climate, or perhaps a lazy, entitled populace. Probably both, and I don't know which is in the lead. [/b]
|
I was answering from a perspective of 'what is important to the ecomony' and not from a personal perspective. Furthermore, this personal perspective only confuses the important issue - the future of all media industries.
From a personal perspective, to use Napster only to steal music is wrong. Although Napster was a way for people to share music - perfectly legal. Napster exists one the hairy edge of legal. But to duplicate Word 2000 for all friends because you think it costs too much - clearly just greedy stealing.
From the larger perspective, is it real to demand copyright protection from sharing for 20 years when the non-profit distribution is so common after 5? Copyright for music to be used in a commercial - yes. Copyright from non-profit distribution - it makes no sense. There are some serious questions to be asked - and like in the criminalization of mariguana - these question will not be asked.
To take only because you think it is overpriced is stealing. But to maintain obsoleted business models in the face of new technologies is to encourage criminal acts. Two completely different perspectives. It does not justify the individuals acts but the act is inevitable in an business based on obsoleted distribution laws.
We have other absurd laws such as not equating cigarettes equal to crack cocaine, and criminalizing mariguana. Some mandatory jail sentences are longer than those for murder. Do I condone the individual use of hazardous drugs like cigarettes or crack? No. But like Napster, the billions spend on drugs is directly traceable to another obsolete and unworkable business model - the drug laws and their promoters - extremist right wing Jesse Helms / Dan Burton types.
Perspective again. I don't condone the stealing of music only because it is so expensive. But I recognize Napster as a symptom of an industry that can't adapt to change - just like drug laws are rediculous and absurd. Napster and drug smugglers are inevitable when laws are unrealistic.
Perspective of the individual user (drug or music) is different from overall economic judgements (Napster or drug smuggling industry).