That's a bit of an oversimplification.
For example, "rightfully theirs" is a term that's open to a LOT of interpretation. The jurisdiction I live in charges a levy on blank electronic media, purportedly to cover losses due to copying. If I've already paid a fee to cover copying, I should be able to copy freely.
As far as "stealing is stealing", please clarify when I've committed theft:
- When I photocopy a favourite poem from a book?
- When I watch a movie on Blu-Ray that I've borrowed from a friend?
- When I take a picture of a sculpture in a museum?
etc.
CDs cost pennies (mechanically) to make. Audio cassettes cost substantially more to make. And yet, CDs are more expensive than audio cassettes ever were. Why is that? Aren't consumers being "ripped off"?
Fair use rights are under attack everywhere. It's ludicrous that some expect purchasers of CD audio to pay a second fee to listen on an MP3 player, for example. IMO, it's equally ludicrous to expect someone who has already paid for software to pay again, if the disk becomes damaged.
Anyway, some food for thought. Not that I expect you to change your mind, or anything.
You'll get no argument from me on any of those points, 6K.
My generalization referenced the term of "piracy", and I should have been more clear. I agree with you. I pay the levy too, and I also feel that the consumer is being ripped off. Badly, I might add. The words "financial rape" come to mind, though I hate to use the term.
The idea of replacing the damaged media that you already paid for isn't stealing, as far as I am concerned. You paid for the item, and the right to use it. What I object to is the notion that if one buys a CD or piece of software, that it's perfectly ok to make copies for your friends, or to download a torrent of the software that you want, and not buy it. If you do that, then you are depriving someone, or a company, of income that they would normally receive if you or your friends paid for your copies of the item.
There are some gray ares, certainly. In Canada, where I live, it's apparently not acceptable to record television programming. Um... I can buy a VCR/DVR if I want to, legally, and my cable company handed me a nice shiny DVR when they hooked us up??? I pay the levy on recordable media, so I have a right to copy my CDs over to my MP3 player, and I don't care what the RIAA says. By their definition, I can't even play music at a party! I have a right to use my music for personal use in any format that I wish to (so says me, anyway), but I also won't burn a CD for someone that is too cheap to buy the CD for themselves. It's mine, buy your own.
I completely believe in fair use, and I won't have an item that I have paid for be restricted in the way that I use it. I don't care what the powers that be think of that one. On the other side of the coin, my partner and I have a thing about all of our software being legal or open source. We have five computers and a server, and each has a legal OS and licenses, and a legal copy of the software that runs on them. We wouldn't have it any other way, but if I lose or scratch my MS Office disk, for example, you're darn right I'm going to get a copy from somewhere as a replacement to reinstall with my legal key, if necessary.
My grumble isn't with the regular type pf person who loans a Blu-Ray disk, or copies songs to his/her iPod, it's some of the people in this thread suggesting that piracy is perfectly ok, and acceptable depending on your moral code. I don't care what a person's moral code is, or what their "interpretation" of the law might be. Using software that you haven't paid for is wrong, and so is sharing it with someone who hasn't paid for it. In most jurisdictions it's a crime, and it's no different than breaking into someone's house and looting their CD collection.
I guess I'm just a stuffy old lady, but what's wrong is wrong.
