Denver wrote: >> I wouldn't phrase it in terms of equine scatology, but >> when the law precludes vital new cultural forms it is >> the law that is wrong.
> Then it is our responsibility to fix the law or move to > a country where the law is right. Feel free to devote your life to getting legislation changed in an environment where bills are voted on without even having been read and where the votes strongly tend to go the way desired by the lobbyists who make the largest campaign contributions. But to me, that sounds a lot more difficult than just ignoring bad legislation or, if I'm feeling charitable, than developing technology to help others to ignore it. > Civil disobedience can be useful in some situations, but > it is not useful to have a society where the norms codified > in law and the norms that people follow are significantly > different. When there is a significant difference, it is > difficult for an individual to judge whether their actions > are fair. If most people really looked to guidance from legislators to know what's fair, then our species would be doomed and rightly so. Fortunately, I don't think it's difficult at all for individuals to judge whether their actions are fair. They may judge this differently, but with a good deal of overlap, and that will be the case regardless of the ambient legislative environment. > For example, when people download movies illegally for > their viewing pleasure (which is a norm that many people > follow today), it is unfair to those that choose to obey > the law because the people that illegally download movies > are receiving a benefit that those who obey the law are not. The same is true if I ignore a law to jump off a bridge that others obey. Why should I observe legislation that is unfair to me just because others are willing to do so? > I don't believe that we want to live in a society where > people believe that what is right is whatever they can get > away with without being caught. What does that have to do with seeing intellectual property legislation as damage and routing around it? >> As I said, "...the point that this stuff should be possible >> does need making". > I agree. The laws need to be fixed, preferably toward less > copyright protection so that the legality of mix culture is > not under question. If that doesn't work, there is always the > option of moving to a country without copyright laws. I wasn't aware the latter was an option. The closest I know of is the Commonwealth of Dominica, of which I am a citizen and part time resident. I think there's the usual IP stuff on the books, but no one pays it much attention. All the videos at the local video shop have that "If you've rented this video, please call 1-800-N0-COPYS" message scrolling along the bottom of the movie, for example. And given how inexpensive cable TV there is, and how it includes every premium channel, I really doubt HBO and Showtime are getting their cut. Yet despite this rampant lawlessness, it's still a calm, civil place. (Well, except during Carnival.) The bottom line is that life is too short to let legislators tell you what you can and can't do. -=Steve=- -- Stephen H. Foerster http://hiresteve.com http://wikieducator.org _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
