Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site hydra.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!think!mit-eddie!cybvax0!frog!hydra!die From: die@hydra.UUCP (Dave Emery) Newsgroups: net.ham-radio,net.video Subject: Re: Theft is Theft Message-ID: <133@hydra.UUCP> Date: Sun, 22-Sep-85 22:59:44 EDT Article-I.D.: hydra.133 Posted: Sun Sep 22 22:59:44 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 25-Sep-85 10:47:13 EDT References: <128@hydra.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA Lines: 45 Xref: linus net.ham-radio:2657 net.video:1459 >From the artificial intelligence of hplabs!hpscda!hpscdx!garyg >Gary Gitzen >Hewlett-Packard >I saw your recent posting re > Theft is Theft. >and concluded that you have obviously thrown away your TV set because >it will receive signals that someone has paid to transmit. >Your argument is specious. Perhaps more accurately poorly phrased. Broadcast TV transmission, program material, and production are funded by people who want me to watch it and who do not charge a fee for normal home use. Many other signals are transmitted by organizations that are providing a service to subscribers who are expected to pay for that service. If I pirate that service for free then I am doing nothing to cover the costs of providing it, (what I meant by `paid to transmit'). By pirating the service I deny the provider just compensation for his costs in obtaining and transmitting the material, and also (another subtler point) his right to control who uses it and for what. I find it very hard to justify such an act from a moral standpoint, It seems to me that obtaining a service for free that cost someone many thousands of dollars to provide is theft pure and simple. It is clear that some signals are provided for all to use, some distribute material meant for a group of specific subscribers, and some contain private material meant for one or more authorized recipiants and no one else. It is not clear, whatever the technical ease and simplicity, or the traditional American belief in "free public airwaves" that I have the moral right to use either subscription material or completely private material just because it was there. Granted there is a subtle argument about taking reasonable precautions to ensure privacy (which I strongly beleive means encryption now it is possible, relatively cheap, and does not significantly degrade signal quality), but I do not beleive one has a moral right to use information picked out of the ether that was not transmitted for one's use. David I. Emery Charles River Data Systems 617-626-1102 983 Concord St., Framingham, MA 01701. uucp: decvax!frog!die Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com