[Gllug] Uh oh, ministers consider "anti file-sharing laws"

[Martin A. Brooks]

David Damerell wrote:
> Relative to buying it, certainly; that is not in dispute. But then,
> not playing or buying it _also_ deprives them of income relative to
> buying it.
>   

Errm, no, you've already tried this argument. It was stupid last time too.


> Which brings us to the point you are dodging away from. You produced
> the observation that downloading a cracked game deprives the software
> house of income as justification for the point of view that doing so
> was morally equivalent to stealing;

I see no difference between downloading commercial software and using it 
and stealing software from PC World and using it.  You seem hung on the 
idea that something physical has to be removed for theft to have 
occured: this is obviously bollocks.


>  that still leads naturally to the
> absurd conclusion that simply never having anything to do with the
> game is morally equivalent to stealing as well.
>   

Which restates your, still stupid, argument.

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug