Dam Wookie wrote...
Alodar wrote..
This is curious logic. If you are unhappy with the decisions of your car dealership do you feel you are justified stealing your next car from them?
Alodar
It is strange that you quote logic and then fail in its use yourself.
To fail in its use would I not have to attempt to use it?
I asked a question, I did not make an argument.
You are curiously presupposing a set of beliefs that it would take to ask that question.
Furthermore it should be noted that you are not arguing logic, you are arguing premise.
Premise: Stealing a car and stealing software are both stealing.
Conclusion: If you think stealing from a car company is wrong, then stealing from a Software developer is equally wrong.
The logic is unassailable. It is the premise you disagree with.
These products are not material products and can be duplicated without loss of the original. They do not fall completely under set of rules defining material products.
Here you seem to be putting forth the premise that stealing things that aren't material products that can be duplicated with no loss of the original should be under a different set of rules. Fortunately this premise can be easily tested.
I suggest you try the following three things.
[*] Get a camera and make your way to a building called the Pentagon in a city called Washington, in the United States of America. The building is easy to spot, it's the one with the extra wall. Go find some files labeled "Top Secret" and take pictures of the pages inside them.
[*] Next take your camera and go to Sony's development labs. Take pictures of everything they are working on and any white boards you happen to see.
[*] Finally, the next time you see someone use a credit card, copy down the number and the CV code. Then use that number to make a bunch of online purchases.
During you trials please explain to the US government, the Sony Corporation, and Visa they weren't material products and that they can be duplicated with no loss of the original so they should be under a different set of rules.
See where that gets you.
In what way is:
A) A car a series of products?
A car removing previouse abilities pre purchase?
C) Stealing a car from a dealership akin to the theory of game piracy protecting the game player from being ripped off.
You seem to be attempting distinguish the theft of software and the theft of cars. Your first two questions are curious because cars are a series of products and they do remove and add features to new models all the time. So you've shown how software and cars are similar.
Your last question is interesting because you are implying that theft of video games is some sort of consumer protection.
Again, I ask the question: would you steal a car to protect yourself from buying a lemon? Would you steal a TV to make sure they hadn't changed features that you previously enjoyed?
Stealing from companies whose decisions you don't agree with is still theft.
Even the simplest of simpletons could clearly see that.
Indeed.
Alodar
Modifié par Alodar, 13 avril 2010 - 01:07 .