cheated and ripped off as well. So I'm asking you, if you believe there is a moral justification for one, why not the other? Our collective morals have always supported fair, equal competition. They support two people going in a ring with gloves, equal weight, equal class and boxing it out. They don't support one hiding a razorblade in his fist, or one kicking the other in the junk. One business out competing another with a better original idea is the fundamental basis of fair market competition. It is completely morally acceptable to almost all. Taking my work, my innovation, and using it to make money for yourself without permission or a penny given back is not fair. It is parasitism and opportunism at its worse. No one expects business to be a fairytale for everyone. But they do expect all sides to play fair. And when they don't, it's the job of the government to play referee and intervene with things like antitrust tribunals, or in this case, anti-piracy law. Morality is always among the fundamental drivers of the law. The law cannot be written or enforced without first asking, "What is right and what is wrong?" That is a personal question everyone has to ask of themselves. To claim that morals have nothing to do with the law is to misunderstand the law. Morality has everything to do with legality. Whether you are a Marxist, libertarian, or liberal, you cannot separate morality from legality. Re: This site is