Re: I'm at a loss for words

[steve@pacificnet.net (Steven W. Mentzer)]

>
>A better argument would be a comparison to the following scenario:
>
>        Are you justified in accusing a drifter of theft
>        for a car which I abandoned 5 years ago, and that
>        I no longer acknowledge that a) it exists, or
>        b) it is mine?
>
>        Similarly, can he be accused of theft of software
>        for which the company does not acknowledge either
>        knowledge or ownership?
>
>        Yes, if he steals the car while I still am using it,
>        it indeed is theft, and he should be punished for
>        that.  But after I've abandoned it?
>
>

Great argument, but once again, they will continue to paint the person
who steals the abandoned car as a "thief" etc etc etc.. Clearly 
pointless. Yes, the only argument they have is one of morality. The 
difference between right and wrong, black and white. Yet, they are 
setting the standard. 

I bet that if you went to the majority of people and poised the above 
argument, they would agree that taking the vehicle after its been 
abandoned might in a sense be wrong (if viewed from a black vs. white 
perspective), but in a way is acceptable.

Right and wrong is never black and white. Especially when people like
nathan and his other idiots define what black and white really are.

smentzer@pacbell.net