From: flbbs!larry.mittman@ncoast.ORG (Larry Mittman) 
Newsgroups: alt.bbs
Subject: Re: Stealing software (wa
Date: 10 Oct 92 15:50:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Fleet BBS (216) 646-0655 24 hrs HST
Reply-To: flbbs!larry.mittman@ncoast.ORG (Larry Mittman) 

 On 10-10-92 JOHN DECARLO wrote to ALL... 
 
 JD> Newsgroups: alt.bbs 
 JD> From: jdecarlo@mitre.org (John DeCarlo) 
 JD> Subject: Re: Stealing software (was: Re: Big Brother BBS policies) 
 JD> Message-ID: <jdecarlo.319.718630704@mitre.org> 
 JD> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 11:38:24 GMT 
 JD> 
 JD> In article <702#alchemy.UUCP> tim@alchemy.UUCP (Timothy M. Hood) 
 JD> writes: 
 JD> 
 JD> >In article <118.11148#uonline.com> rjus@uonline.com (ren_just) 
 JD> writes: 
 JD> >>dhesi@cirrus.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes: 
 JD> >>: 
 JD> >>: There are good reasons why not everybody agrees that unauthorized 
 JD> copying 
 JD> >>: is always wrong.  For example, I see nothing wrong with making 
 JD> three 
 JD> >>: backup copies where a signed software license allows only two. 
 JD> 
 JD> >Your understanding of the relationship between wrong and illegal is 
 JD> >flawed.  There are things which may be wrong which may not be 
 JD> illegal, but 
 JD> >anything illegal is wrong.  Illegal is a subset of wrong, not an 
 JD> >intersection. 
 JD> 
 JD> Yow! Talk about someone with a flawed set of beliefs.  When freeing 
 JD> slaves 
 JD> is illegal, it is wrong?  (And magically becomes right when the law 
 JD> changes?).  Legal and illegal have pretty much zero to do with right 
 JD> and 
 JD> wrong. 
 JD> 
 JD> When talking about intangibles, such as software, you have to 
 JD> understand 
 JD> where the possibility of theft might occur.  Obviously duplicating 
 JD> bits 
 JD> isn't directly theft, any more than photocopying is.  So you aren't 
 JD> stealing 
 JD> diskettes or ones and zeros, but acquiring a copy in an unauthorized 
 JD> manner. 
 JD> This is why there are copyright laws, to govern how copies can be 
 JD> authorized.  Unauthorized copying isn't the same thing as stealing to 
 JD> most 
 JD> people, since no one loses anything tangible. 
 JD> 
 JD> Take your example of stealing a Ferrari because you can't afford one. 
 JD> 
 JD> Obviously an example of misunderstanding the situation.  OTOH, suppose 
 JD> 
 JD> you went and stole a Ferrari from your neighbor in such a way that she 
 JD> still 
 JD> had her Ferrari (now there are two Ferraris where there was just one 
 JD> before 
 JD> you stole hers),  now the situation would be analogous. 
 JD> 
 JD> The hard part in software duplication cases is proving any damages, 
 JD> which is 
 JD> why there is little profit except educational in prosecuting people 
 JD> who make 
 JD> just a few copies. 
 JD> 
 JD> However, it is illegal to violate copyright laws, even if there is no 
 JD> hard 
 JD> evidence of theft involved. 
 JD> 
 JD> 
 JD> John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own 
 JD> Fidonet:  1:109/131  Internet:  jdecarlo@mitre.org 
I have stood on the sidelines of this debate too long. As a 
programmer, I deal with the possibility of theft all the time. 
If you were a company who tried to use copied software that you 
did not purchase, the FEDERAL COURTS would slap a very large 
fine on you (MANY THOUSANDS of DOLLARS!). This is not me blowing 
hot air, I HAVE SEEN IT HAPPEN MANY TIMES! That is why companies 
are enforcing strict copyright following rules! 
Now, if anyone is still having a hard time understanding this, 
consider the following. You spend many hours researching a topic 
in the library. Then you "sweat blood" composing a very thoughtful 
and incisive termpaper on your word processor. Just under the 
deadline you complete it and print it out. You go off to the pub 
for some "brewskies" to relax. While you are gone, Joe Schmoe, the 
yuppie brat from down the hall comes into your room, looks at the 
directory, sees your project on the hard disk, and makes a copy 
(using his own floppies of course). He goes back to his room, 
changes some spelling and the author's name (5 minutes work) then 
prints it out. He submits it first and gets credit for a "Job 
well done". Now, you were the one who did all the work, should he 
be allowed to get credit or even to use your paper without your 
permission? This is the same case as software PIRACY - nothing 
more or less than PURE, UNADULTERATED THEFT!!! 
 
 
 
 
... OFFLINE 1.42 * Power Corrupts...Absolute Power still needs line conditioning!