![]() I'm not an advocate of taking other peoples' software and forcing it to be free, against the creators' wishes. I am a huge advocate of open source software. Is it their right to charge for content they've created? In my opinion, yes. ![]() Is it a right to make money off of Game of Thrones? No. >Is it a 'human right' to make money off of Game of Thrones or Batman Begins? There is an argument to be had that perhaps the compensation for these roles is skewed relative to their importance, but I don't believe that argument would lead to “therefore, no one has any right to make money on Game of Thrones.” It's both, and why shouldn't it be? The studio executives behind making Game of Thrones play their part just as George RR Martin and Aidan Gillen do. There's no need to protect the business model of content distributors in a world that has the Internet. > Copyright is a subsidy to distributors, not artists. We have the opposite of a monopoly on our culture. I would guess, though I can't back this up, that at this point in history we have more free culture than ever before. Anyone can create culture, and they have the ability to choose how exclusive it is. Especially with the internet, we're not in that situation. (Or if it was group, it'd be an oligopoly, but I'd still understand your point.) But we're not in that situation. A monopoly would be if only company could “create” culture. > As Rick Falkvinge is so eloquent in saying, this is our culture, and permitting monopolies on it is just disastrously bad policy. For example, most people would not agree that I have a certain right to act violently at times, because of my violent impulses. We also do not categorically say that all of these impulses must be fulfilled in an ethical society. We have many impulses (sex, food, violence), and acting on them unquestioningly would lead to many unethical things. It's certainly the case that sharing certain information with certain parties is a high impulse, but the idea that we have a strong impulse for all information to be shared freely is highly unintuitive to me, merely based on my experiences.įurthermore, that something is an impulse does not make it ethical. I don't think you can assert this without providing some backup. That's pretty much the highest impulse a human has, right up there with "protect your offspring". > I would say it's clearly ethical, even required, to share knowledge and information with other people. I'd say it's wrong because it's hurtful, and I don't like being hurt. I guess you could say I have ethics in that if you asked me why I don't, I'd say "it's wrong", but I'd never say something is "clearly unethical" and try to argue why. I don't hurt people, and I don't steal (physical things), because I have empathy. I don't think about whether what I do is ethical. I guess my point is, I don't think ethics matter. ![]() Those aren't rhetorical questions, I'm genuinely curious. You don't pirate, ever? Because it's "clearly unethical"? Do everyone in your social circles hold similar opinions? Do you jaywalk? Have you ever used drugs, or facilitated illegal drinking? So I have no qualms with people I know doing so, nor if I were to do so myself. The fact is, it's socially acceptable, among my social circles, to pirate, to use drugs, and to underage drinking. You know what the truth is, for me, and everyone I know, at least? The truth is, we don't care about "other" people's opinions on ethics (where "other" people=people on the internet, in the government, in anti-piracy ads, etc). ![]() Are these unethical? Someone clearly thought so. I also know people who use drugs illegally, as well as participate in or facilitate underage drinking, and I don't have a problem with any of it. ![]() Why do you think this "clearly unethical"? I don't think it's clear at all.Įveryone I know pirates movies, TV shows, and music. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |