Re: Asimov Site

["Frank Townsend" <ftownsen@iamdigex.net>]

"Paul Schlyter" <pausch@saafNOSPAM.se> wrote in message
news:8o80ah$jcq$1@merope.saaf.se...

> It becomes particularly pathetic when people argue about ownership of
> stuff which no longer have any value.

    That vintage software has no value is, of course, the premise of those
who argue that they should have unfettered access to it.  But if it has no
intrinsic value, then why do people want it?  If it has no monetary value,
why are people willing to pay money for it on eBay and in other venues.
Besides, I have plenty of things around my house which I treasure, which
have no value to the rest of the universe.  However they are mine, and just
because they are truely valueless does not divest me of ownership.

>
> So the next time you're out hiking somewhere, and you want to pick up
> a stick or a stone -- stop!  Do you really have the right to steal
> stuff that's not yours?  Shouldn't you ask the landowner for permission
> before you pick it up?

First of all, if its not your land, you are trespassing.  You should have
asked first for permission even to enter.  Even if you have a license from
the owner to enter, you do not have an automatic right to remove objects
from the land.  Basic property law.

Yes, that stick or stone is worthless, but
> as we've seen so many times in this newsgroup, ownership issues are
> just as important for worthless items -- it's the PRINCIPLE which counts
> to some, not the value of the items....

Yes, that is correct.  Statutes and other laws against theft never make
mention of value:  theft is taking the property of another without consent.
Any law abiding person follows this principle.