Re: OMG!

[CUTjefbla@bconnex.net (Jeff Blakeney)]

On Wed, 23 May 2001 21:25:20 GMT, "**** ****" <***@***.com> wrote:

>Not necessarily true. With software as old as we are talking about, chances
>are there are quite a few originals that have been destroyed. Also, an
>original copy is a more substantial copy than someone's download off of
>Asimov so that they can play it on an emulator for 3 days, and then they
>delete it so that there is more room for Diablo II. If we contact someone
>who can prove that they've destroyed or thrown away an original,  and ask
>for their "license" are we then legal to download a single "copy" ?

Not unless you can get the original disk.  :-)


>Definitely not true. As far as many users on here today are concerned,
>copyrights are indeed forever, in a very practical sense. Even if the
>expiration is never extended again (a big IF, don't you think?), the
>software in question will in all likelyhood be out of the public domain well
>past my expected lifespan. Even a single extension to the expiration will
>make this certainty. I'd say this would be true for all but the tiniest
>fraction of people "illegally" downloading abandonware. What, maybe some 11
>yr old playing a few apple II games, if he is the rare person to live into
>his 90s might have a chance of downloading such in a manner that satisfies
>the IP nuts. Another 20 year extension, and it's out of his reach, too.

You do know that the copyright holders can voluntarily relinquish
their copyright, don't you?  There is nothing stating the once a work
is copyrighted it remains copyrighted until the copyright expires.

What do you think the Lost Classics Project and the Treasure Chest
Project are doing?  They are getting people to reclassify their works
so that they can (usually) be freely, and legally, distributed.  No
need to wait for the copyright to expire.  If people spent as much
time and effort in helping get stuff reclassified as they do in
creating pirate FTP sites, uploading and downloading pirated software
and justifying their reasons for ignoring the law then there would be
a lot more stuff available legally right now.

>And then there is the issue of the IP industry not taking care of
>"intellectual property" even though it has historical value. Hollywood has
>corporate vaults full of film from the 40's and even earlier, that is
>literally rotting. No one could make copies of it legally, and they don't
>feel inclined to do so.

All the more reason to get them to reclassify their works.

>Trials are cool. Those are those events where an innocent person can be sent
>to prison for 15 years, and even after proven innocent, right?

Yup.  :-)

>Hmm. When a piece of property is lost, there is no need to prove it, beyond
>waiting a reasonable amount of time for the owner to claim it. Generally,
>this can be from 2 to 8 weeks, depending on the locality. When you pick a
>dime up off the ground, do you wait forever for the rightful owner to claim
>it? Don't act like this is an asinine question either, answer it. I've heard
>too many times that it's not the value of the property, but the principal of
>the thing. And it's obvious that it's just as difficult to prove the
>abandonment of the dime, as to prove abandonment of the software.

Unfortunately the analogy doesn't work.  You are talking about a
physical thing that can't be readily copied like intellectual
property.  Also, in the case of money, there is a defined system for
determining if it's abandoned or not.  You turn it in to the
authorities and if, after a certain period of time, no one claims it,
then it is yours.  There is no defined system for determining whether
an intellectual property has been abandoned or not.

However, it is far easier to prove abandonment of software than it is
with something like a dime.  You know who owns the copyright to the
software so you can contact them and ask them.  The dime, you have no
idea who owns it.

>And if it's the law that all jews must wear stars of david on their clothing
>while in public? Bad laws are bad laws. That some are simply mild enough
>that the idiotic masses can ignore them comfortably is certainly some kind
>of principle. I can't ignore these laws comfortably, and yet...

Yes, sometimes there are bad laws.  Usually, those laws don't last as
society realizes they are bad laws and removes them.  Remember slavery
was legal in the US once.  :-)

Copyright law has been changed many times in the past century and I'm
sure it will continue to change in the future.  Until they change,
however, I'm going to continue to try to abide by the current laws the
best I can.

>Keeping morality and legality seperate. Let's think about this a moment.
>Might have something to do with a belief that laws are created simply so
>that you can exploit things to your heart's content. My morals keep me from
>particpating in a legal system designed solely so that immoral cretins can
>cheat and steal as they see fit. Personally, I need a moral justification to
>be part of such a system, otherwise it's just an obstacle to avoid. Since
>you have problems with people avoiding this obstacle known as the legal
>system, why don't you explain this to us? It really boils down to "don't get
>caught" or "there is a reason you should obey this law". No one here really
>doubts that if caught, and the system wants to make an example of them, that
>they won't be crushed.

Laws are created to give everyone in a society a standard set of rules
to live by.  Morals are personal rules that people live by and create
for themselves from a variety of influences throughout their lives.

This is why I try to keep morals and legal issues separate.  Morals
are personal and therefore subjective.  Laws are impersonal and
therefore objective.

Personally, I think it morally wrong to pirate Apple II software
regardless of how old it is.  You seem to to feel that morally it is
okay to do so.  Some people think that is is morally okay to pirate
software that is more than 10 years old, others 5 years.  How can a
society exist with such a system where everyone determines what is
okay based on their own personal beliefs?  The answer is, it can't.

That is why laws were created.  A single system with well defined
rules that everyone who agrees to be part of that society agree to
abide by.

If we were playing poker and I pull an ace out of my sleeve and added
it to my hand, would I have broken the rules of the game?  Yes.  Was I
immoral to do so?  It depends on who you ask and why I did it.  Do you
see the difference?

I can confidently say that anyone pirating Apple II software is
clearly breaking the law and no one can disagree with me because we
have a law that states the they can't do that.  Morally, though, I can
only say what my own belief on the matter is and there is nothing to
back up my statement on the morality of the issue.

>You also stand at the side of the freeway yelling at cars as they thunder
>by, screaming that speedning is illegal? Speeding does actually lead to
>tragic events, from time to time. You have a better chance of doing good
>that way, I would think.

Not the side of the road, that'd be too dangerous.  I yell at people
from in my car for speeding, illegal lane changes, running red lights,
not coming to a complete stop and other infractions.  :-)

>I admit it. I break lots of laws. Most of the time, I go out of my way to
>break the stupid/immoral laws. I'm not a protester either, I'm not doing it
>in front of a police officer, just so that a point can be made. I'm sneaky,
>and I try to do it in a way that only those who are sympathetic will ever
>see it. Catch me if you can.

In other words, you are scared to get caught breaking the law.  If you
are so comfortable with your belief that you are not doing anything
morally wrong, even though it may be legally wrong, why are you
worried about getting caught?  If your moral position is so stable,
the authorities will obviously see things your way and not charge you.
:-)

>I'm a collector of software. Not only do I want the original disks, but all
>the materials that came with it, on down to the purchase reciept, if I'm
>lucky enough to get it. Not only would I agree that used copies are better,
>but I fail to see how anyone could argue differently. Unless, sometimes
>there just aren't any originals left... Still, I'd like to know that such
>archives exist, if only as an offsite backup should some used copies of mine
>turn out to be victim to bitrot.

I'd love to see an archive created but one that requires proof of
ownership for restoring damaged originals and not the free for all
pirate sites that are running right now.  That way, nothing would be
lost to history and as more titles get reclassified, the software will
be there to make it freely available.

--
 Jeff Blakeney - Dean of the Apple II Unversity on A2Central.com