Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!sun-barr!newstop!sun!hanami.Eng.Sun.COM!landman
From: landman@hanami.Eng.Sun.COM (Howard A. Landman x61391)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: software piracy
Message-ID: <138145@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: 29 Jun 90 19:19:40 GMT
References: <10592@spool.cs.wisc.edu> <3974@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> <1794@krafla.rhi.hi.is> <1612.2680ce54@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu> <42218@apple.Apple.COM>
Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.misc
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
Lines: 47

Since this newsgroup is going away soon, followups to comp.sys.mac.misc.

In article <42218@apple.Apple.COM> jordan@Apple.COM (Jordan Mattson) writes:
>  Seriously now, when are people going to learn that laws are - often - a
>codification of morality.  It is wrong to take things that do not belong to
>you --- that is why we have laws against it.

Unfortunately, laws are also - often - a codification of fear, jealousy,
bigotry, misinformation, hypocrisy, and the interests of those who have
large amounts of wealth and want more.  There is no necessary relationship
between what is moral and what is legal.

Personally, I will "learn that laws are ... a codification of morality" when
it's true.  No sooner.

Also, just as a mental exercise, you might try *proving* rigorously that
copying software is "taking" anything at all.  It's not all that easy!

Further, copyright and patent law is EXPLICITLY based on social good, NOT
on morality or individual rights.  The reason the state offers this protection
is to benefit society by encouraging the creation of new works and processes.
If someone came up with a better way to do that, all of today's protections
might be discarded.  So any argument against software piracy which is based
on copyright or patent law, should address issues of social good only and not
attempt to bludgeon people with specious moral rhetoric.

I don't approve of piracy, but it's sickening to see that computer
professionals can't even agree on basic facts.  How can we expect the rest
of society to understand?

A thought experiment: You invent an intelligent robot.  You would like to
educate it.  However, under current copyright law, your robot is forbidden
to:
	- Read books, magazines, or newspapers
	- Watch movies or television
	- Look at a computer screen with a protected interface
	- Examine the source or binary code of copyrighted programs
	- View most works of art
	- Access most online computerized databases

and so on.  Why?  Because the robot makes copies of all these things in its
memory banks when perceiving them.  Now explain to the robot why depriving it
in this way is fair, moral, and of benefit to society.

--
	Howard A. Landman
	landman@eng.sun.com -or- sun!landman