Re: Net piracy?

[jeffr@bmerha2a.bnr.ca (Jeffrey Robertson)]

In article <304q7p$rir@news.iastate.edu>,
Ian Schmidt <irsman@iastate.edu> wrote:
>In article <304maa$e23@crl4.crl.com> dkl@crl.com (David K. Leikam) writes:
>>  re: Lost classics, piracy, etc.
>>
>>  The "Theft is theft, plain and simple" argument strikes me as moronic. 
>>(I hope I'm really offending somebody, here.)  I have this friend who 
>
>It's offending me quite a bit.  A is A.  Calling something by a pretty
>18-letter name doesn't change the fact that it's theft, and it's
>illegal, and a lot of other things.  

I'm the guy who posted the (too long) article claiming that piracy of
software isn't theft.  I hold to that statement.  Piracy is a copyright
violation.  I don't know if that's 18 letters or not, but it's what
it is.  Yes, rose by any other name would smell as sweet, but calling
a tulip a rose is just plain inaccurate.

Now, I take copyright violation seriously, especially software copyright.
I'm in the industry after all, though few people pirate telephone
transmission software :-)  You can argue all you want about the fairness
of copyright law.  (Ie. the fact you must defend your copyright)  Lawyers
for big companies have tried that.  (eg. the legality of home taping of
movies off of TV --> fair use.)  You can even argue that copyright
violation is theft, but don't ask me to pay attention to you.

Cheers,
-- 
-------------------------------------+----------------+-----------------
Jeffrey Robertson                    |  jeffr@bnr.ca  |      BNR, Ottawa
"I speak for myself, not BNR" - Me   +----------------+       (Meriline)
"Verbing weirds language" - Calvin                      OC-48 FiberWorld