Subject: Re: Copyright request?!? Difference Moral/Legal ?
From: CUTblakeney@home.com (Jeff Blakeney)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Organization: Shaw@Home
Reply-To: CUTblakeney@home.com (Jeff Blakeney)
Message-ID: <37668472.1393420@news>
References: <199906071256.MAA08907@berlin.neuropa.net> <37629E8E.A11319F6@earthlink.net> <37645d24.2216771@news> <3765A0D8.DAC0EBF@dcsi.net.au>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230
Lines: 95
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 17:28:30 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.66.25.132
X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 10:28:30 PDT



On Tue, 15 Jun 1999 10:39:52 +1000, brennie <brennie@dcsi.net.au>
wrote:

>Agreed, there are always reasons for laws being in place. However, 
>just because something is legal, doesn't make it moral. And just 
>because something is illegal, doesn't make it immoral. Copywrite
>laws were originally created to protect the intellectual property
>rights of the developer of the work for a period of time ( so that
>they could make some money from it - if they wanted to ). After that
>time it would then be available to all. However, the original intent
>was subverted. Look at your own constitution as an example. 

I don't see how it was subverted.  The law still protects people's
intellectual property for a period of time.  It is the pirate's that
don't agree with this policy and are trying to subvert it.

>In my own country, we have had a federal politician stand up a few 
>years ago and condemn a group of people for hiding people from the
>immigration officials because their visa's had expired. They were
>hidden because to be sent back to their country would mean imprisonment
>or death. The people who participated in the protection were christians. His
>statement included a line like the following - "christians are law-abiding,
>so you must turn these people over to the proper authorities". He made the 
>mistake of thinking that just because a law existed - that this was morality.

I don't think he mistook a law as a moral.  He knew that as members of
your society that they had agreed to live according to the laws of
that society and they are therefore bound to obey and uphold those
laws regardless of how they felt about it morally.

>Morality requires responsibility for your actions and the acceptance of the
>consequences. Laws provide a way to bypass personal responsibility.

I'm not sure I agree here.  I'm pretty sure I understand what you mean
by laws providing a way to bypass personal responsiblity because they
force you to pay the consequences but that doesn't take into
consideration that before you break a law you have the personal
responsibility to stop yourself from doing so and if you don't, you
have the personal responsibility to accept the responsibilities.

>You say 
>you "go after people" for minor infractions - is it because you want to 
>teach them personal responsibility or is it for some other reason.

Mostly I do it to make sure that these people realize that they are
breaking the law.  Kind of a good deed for the day type of thing as
ignorance of the law is no excuse.  I'm just trying to save them from
having to pay the consequences for something they might not even
realize is illegal.

Besides, someone just might get hurt or killed because of a "minor"
infraction.

>Piracy is a moral issue not a legal issue. To try and deal with it by law
>is like spitting into the wind, you get covered by your own spit. Teaching
>people to be responsible for their own actions and be aware of the consequences
>to themselves and to others is a much better way to go - but a great deal more
>difficult to do.

I agree to a point.  Yes, piracy can be considered a moral issue but
it most certainly is a legal issue.  If it wasn't a legal issue, there
would be no moral issues associated with it.

I like to keep the law and morality separate.  They tend to mix like
oil and water.

Laws are rules that a society has agreed to follow regardless of how
it might affect them.  Disobeying the law leads to consequences.
Everyone in a society, even people visiting a foreign society, agree
to abide by these laws or face the consequences.  There is no ifs, and
or buts about it.

Morality is a personal thing.  Everyone has their own set of morals
and ethics which are acceptable to them.  They usually stem from their
upbringing, religion, personal experience and that sort of thing.  Not
everyone shares the same morals and so you can get different opinions
about whether a certain issue is moral or not.

If I were to ask people whether "pirating" older software that was
still protected by copyright law but no longer available commercially
was morally okay, I'd get a mix of yes and no answers.  If I were to
ask whether it was legally okay, there is only one answer: no.

Here's another example to get this post closer to being on topic for
this newsgroup.  When Apple Computer stopped supporting the Apple II
line, were they legally allowed to do so?  Yes.  Was it a moral thing
for them to do?  I don't think so but I'm sure they feel it was.  :)

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Jeff Blakeney - Dean of the Apple II University in A2Pro on Delphi     |
|                    Delphi Apple II Forums Web Pages                    |
| A2: http://www.delphi.com/apple2   A2Pro: http://www.delphi.com/a2pro  |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
   HyperCard IIgs course now in session in the A2Pro forum on Delphi
        Learn to Program in GSoft BASIC course now in session