i guess i'll add something more substantive than ad hom, though frankly i simply do not have the patience of saint quad and others here...
Norsefire:
your argument essentially amounts to "piracy is bad 'cuz it's illegal." you have not shown how piracy adversely impacts the creators of music or software, and quadrophonics, Randwolf, and others have shown how piracy may very well work to the benefit of the creators of such.
a lot of musicians are also software engineers; in fact, the creators of those immensely popular games in which one plays along with a song on some sort of guitar and drum hand modules--guitar hero? and that other one? fuck, i don't know; i don't play video games unless they're all text (
zork, hitchhiker's guide...)--are
all musicians. and they
all have piles of copied cds and pirated software lying about their homes, which they've been kind enough to share with me. of course, one can't very well pirate
that game, as such would involve fabricating the hand controllers as well, but that's irrelevant.
the point is: an awful lot of these "pirates" are musicians, software engineers, etc.--they've created the stuff which is being pirated, and they, in turn, do their share of pirating. they (we, rather) are well aware that much of the piracy takes place well outside of the "industry," IOW most pirates have not contributed or created "product"
to be pirated, but they are not phased by this--because even those pirates outside of the "industry" seem to be contributing
something to the cause of the musicians, engineers, etc., specifically: promotion.
what about the stuff that does not suffer for lack of promotion? Randwolf's thesis--in post #71--would be difficult, if not impossible, to prove; yet
your contention--that the creators are suffering due to piracy--is every bit as difficult to prove. and you have provided NO evidence which establishes that the creators are suffering. rather, you have provided some dubious claims from, what,
someone from the dixie chicks?! and has she provided evidence to support her claim?
consider sly1's contention:
You are focusing on an insignificant theft crime when more severe theft cases that truely hurt people are off your radar because you are trying to make all theft cases equal and make the whole issue black and white when really....piracy really isnt putting people in the poor house....just back on stage.
http://sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2458645&postcount=84
so why is it that these more severe cases,
which truly hurt people, are off your radar? for instance, you do not seem concerned over the matter of musicians (who deal with unscrupulous major labels) who are being cheated by their labels--why is this? if something is not considered theft by legal definition, does it completely fly under your radar? is everything really this black-and-white for you? is the man who steals a loaf of bread for his starving family a "pathetic, unjust, immoral, enemy of the state and a virus upon society"? am
i, when i "steal" a dog from the person who is neglecting and abusing the animal?