> Depends upon your definition of theft. If you are looking at it from the
> thief's point of view, then stealing something regardless of value, then
> giving it away would tend to make one think it's not stealing. From the
> person's point of view who owned the object, it doesn't matter if it had
> value or not, it's still gone. From an intellectual property point of
view,
> it doesn't matter if it is resold or not, the act deprives the owner of
> revenue.
I define theft as taking something that belongs to someone else.
To me, depriving the owner's revenue is NOT theft. Piracy is one effect of
the natural flow of trade. Businesses deprive other businesses revenue as
a result of competition. Piracy is no different than you creating an online
store and selling merchandise, only to discover that buy.com sells the same
merchandise at below cost price to pull customers away from you.
Obviously, buy.com is purposely taking a loss so that more customers buy
from them and not from other stores. It is depriving other businesses of
revenue.
It's only natural that businesses want to maximize their profits. It
doesn't make sense to say that we should help businesses maximize their
profits, otherwise we would be stealing from them. Piracy is the effect of
supply and demand in the software markets.
Also, you're defining 'theft' in terms of tangible objects. In the case
of software piracy, the owner of the software loses nothing tangible. The
software is STILL THERE. What the owner loses is the POTENTIAL to make
money.
Analogously, suppose you created a model ship. It took you weeks to
construct the model ship. Then, one night, someone brought a cloning
machine, cloned your model ship, and took the clone of your ship back to his
house. Did this person just steal from you? I say NO, because your
model ship is still in your house. IF the person decided to SELL his
cloned ship, then it would be stealing because the money that he receives
should've been yours, because it's your sweat that created the ship. But
if the person isn't making money off his cloned ship, then the fact that you
want him and others to buy that ship instead of cloning it for free, just
shows that _you_ want money. You didn't lose anything, but you want to
gain something.
Everybody wants to gain something, but external forces usually stops you
from gaining. That's why we have to work everyday instead of taking that 1
year vacation. If piracy is one of these external forces, then it's just
another way of life.
> 1. If it's probably true that companies could increase their profits if
> there were less piracy, then it would be true that pirates cost these
> companies money. If these companies are selling intellectual property and
> they are missing revenue due to them because of piracy, then it is also
safe
> to say that this act can be considered theft.
You're using the definition that depriving one's potential profit is theft.
I disagree with this definition.
> 2. Your broker did not steal your money. You paid for your broker's
advice,
> good or bad. That is the agreement that your both entered. If you somehow
> took advice from your broker, good or bad, and didn't pay, then this would
> also be theft. If you didn't wish to pay for bad as well as good advice,
> then this should be considered when entering into the arrangement.
Yes of course. I said to the effect of, "to say piracy is theft is like
saying your broker stole your money because you would've made more money if
your broker isn't there..."
I meant that to be a ridiculous example. Of course your broker didn't steal
your money. :)
Herry
--
For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see
http://www.palmos.com/dev/tech/support/forums/
