Universities that are caught stealing software should be excluded from Cork 2008/2009 world's debate

In this round I am going to rebut the opposition on their two points, and then reaffirm the government's case. 1st, Rebuttal 1)Opp / This is not the proper way to punish the universities The opposition claims that the responsible parties should be tracked down and dealt with, like the dirty dogs they are. The government concedes this to the opposition, as being the right thing to do, in some geographic locations around the world. However, there are parts of this world that make it very hard to hold people accountable for their actions, such as the current border skirmishes going on between Thailand and Cambodia. Different cultures look at the concept of software theft differently. Getting a clear and concise conviction is extremely hard to do, if not impossible, in certain countries. Another example of holding people accountable would be the case of Anwar Ibrahim, former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia. No one has held the Malaysian government accountable for the reckless attacks that caused his incarceration, which consequently were over-turned. What will the opposition do, if it is near impossible, to hold anyone accountable for these selfish acts, because the University is in country where there is a constitutional monarchy, and the school in question, is under Royal Patronage? What will the opposition do if the same people who are stealing the software are also the ones in a position to do something about it? The opposition is looking at this as debate in terms of a punishment for a bad-deed committed. Now, if it was a simple as firing the person/s responsible, then the government would agree with the opposition, and feel that punishing the school is the wrong thing to do, but the government is looking at this debate as a way to hold people accountable for their actions, and force a change in behavior. Just because someone is guilty of committing a crime doesn't mean they are going to stop? If you're dealing smack on the streets and get busted, what's the first thing that you are going to do when your lawyer gets you bail? You're going to deal more smack, so you can afford to pay your high priced lawyer to get you off on technicalities. The United States tried to hold Kim Jong il responsible for the direction of his government, and look where that got them? Nowhere! The United States finally came to their senses and began trade embargos, and other types of isolation tactics that have resulted in the current cooperation, and the intended de-listing from the countries that sponsor terrorism. For these reasons, the opposition's first point fails! 2nd, Rebuttal 2)Opp / To do so would be unfair to the students Collateral damage is inevitable in war. As Stalin once said, "you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs." The government concedes to the opposition that some of the students will suffer, but you must ask the question, good for the many, or good for the few? There are three teams, comprised of two debaters a-piece, on average, that competing universities will send to Cork Worlds Debate 2009. If a university has 10,000 students, and only ten of them can't go, please explain how the other 9,990 students will suffer? Even better than that, who many students at that university would even know that a debate club exists? Debate is not something that every single student participates in, and the message that not being allowed to attend the most prestigious debate event, in the world, would certainly register on the radar of the same people stealing the software, financing the debate club, and running the university. For these reasons, the opposition's second point fails! Back to the government's case: As I clearly stated in my opening arguments, this debate is about universities that continue to violate the rules after they have been found guilty, and should be excluded from a prestigious event like the Cork worlds 2009 in an attempt to change their behavior. When you look for role models in society, maybe the names of Terry Fox, Dr. King, and Gandhi come to mind. These people are without-question, great role models, but that is not their job. Dr. King's job was to fight against injustice. Terry Fox's job was to inspire people, and Gandhi's job was to defeat the British. The job of a university is to educate its students. That education includes good morals and ethics. When the university steals software what does that say to the students? It says that stealing is ok! What happens to a society that teaches its students that stealing is ok? The economic impact is incalculable. Let's ask ourselves some commonsense questions. If one country teaches its students that stealing software is wrong, and another country teaches them that it is ok, which one is more likely to steal software? Stolen software hurts the manufactures, and can lead to massive layoffs as a consequence. For these reasons, the government's case stands strong!