From: jprad@faatcrl.faa.gov (Jack Radigan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: PIRACY
Date: 20 Nov 1992 09:15:57 -0500
Organization: FAA Technical Center, Pomona, NJ
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: faatcrl.faa.gov

saj31052@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Scotty A Johnson) writes:

>It is pertinent, since MANY pirated software titles come from these 
>nations.  If this doesn't sound logical to you, then we have nothing
>more to talk about.

  If originals are not exported there, then the only way pirated versions
can come from there is if pirated versions were sent there, ergo; the problem
isn't there, it's where the piracy started in the first place.

>Or maybe they feel stealing cars and the like is wrong.  Do try
>and understand this: TO MANY PEOPLE, THERE IS A GREAT DISTINCTION
>BETWEEN COPY-PIRACY AND TANGIBLE THEFT.

  It's still a rationalization just the same.

  And, it might not be tangible theft so long as you restrict your
view to the disk itself, but it's not if you take into account the
fact that using software derives benefit, be it recreational enjoyment
or productive work.  Whatever it is, the use of software nets you a
quantifiable gain.  If it can be quantified it is essentially tangible.

  If something tangible is acquired without paying for it then it is
considered theft by any reasonable definition.

>But since you haven't gotten it by now, you probably aren't going to.

  Sorry Scotty, it's you that hasn't yet "gotten" it.

>It is true enough that many pirates wouldn't have the "balls" to
>steal a car, though I myself wouldn't resort to such language to 
>prove it.  

  Somehow, "visceral fortitude" doesn't carry the same connotation as
"balls".  

>I have always thought that taking away the possibility
>of punishment increases crime, and therefore exposes ones true
>morals.  Make sense? 

  Not at all.  Just look at the arguments for and against the death penalty
for committing murder.  Studies prove it's not a deterrent, so why have it?

>If so, then you will agree that software piracy
>is an excellent example of what many people believe in, yet would
>not necessarily admit.

  Sadly, piracy is more of a lack of self-control then anything.  Maybe our
society has become too materialistic, but it doesn't really excuse people from
taking things that they don't own, no matter how convient it is to do so, or
how easy it is, or how little harm it is percieved to cause on someone else.

  It's still wrong, and it is harmful, if you choose to really see things for
the way they really are.

>This discussion was intended to give the anti-pirate people some
>insight into the rationale behind many pirates; pirates who don't
>view pirating as strict theft for more reasons than because they
>simply cannot get caught.  However, it appears that you represent
>a sensitive side of the anti-pirate community who doesn't want
>to know what others are thinking, because it simply pisses you off
>to the point of name calling.

  What pisses me off is when people try to justify inexcusable behaviour with
seemingly logical thought.  It's still a rationalization, pure and simple.

  There is no honor in being a pirate, no matter what you may think.  If you
want my respect, admit what you're doing is thievery and that you are a thief,
I still won't agree with what you do, but at least you're not hiding behind
some sham of a rationalization.

  -jack-