(07-21-2009, 08:12 PM)Lavazza Wrote: I'm sorry once again, as I'm not trying to single anyone out on this thread or witch hunt anyone- I'm just responding in a general sense. It's a bit touchy, I'm trying to tread lightly!
No problem! We're cool! This is indeed a touchy subject. I think we're all doing a pretty good job of respectfully disagreeing on certain points.
(07-21-2009, 08:12 PM)Lavazza Wrote: The difference is the keeping of the item that contains the content. The book comparison is a great one because it is very similar to a music CD. You loan a book to someone... they read it and give it back to you. You loan a music CD to someone, they listen to it and give it back to you. The key is- they give it back. It was loaned and returned. Not stealing.
Ah, but what you are neglecting to consider is that, once the book has been read, its content has been transferred to the reader's mind. S/he now stores that content. The mind becomes the storage container.
(07-21-2009, 08:12 PM)Lavazza Wrote: the MP3 has to be considered an 'item' in itself. Just because you can not hold it in your hands... does not mean it is not on the same playing field with books and cds.
I am not disputing that. I agree completely that the digital version is the same as a hardcopy - both contain the data. My point is that so too is your mind.
(07-21-2009, 08:12 PM)Lavazza Wrote: The only case this is true is if that person had a 100% photographic memory. But since most people do not have this, people will tend to want to have a copy of music they like for themselves so they can listen to it more than once. Same thing with good books. (I'll be re-reading the Harry Potter books sometime this year I think!)
In some cases, yes. But not in the case of nonfiction. For example, suppose a friend loans me her fav veg. cookbook, and I write down a few recipes. I now have that knowledge and don't need to purchase the book. Even in the case of fiction, not everyone likes reading books more than once. I never read fiction books a 2nd time. That's just me, but once I know the story, I can't get interested in reading it again. So if I borrowed your HP books, am I stealing from JK Rowling?
(07-21-2009, 08:12 PM)Lavazza Wrote:(07-21-2009, 07:05 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: Is it any more or less stealing based on how many people access the intangible item?
I don't think so, personally.
I don't think so either. That's why I don't think making the music from a cd you bought available for download by 1000s of people is any less or more stealing than loaning a book. It is, however, more serious because it's on a much grander scale. Sort of like stealing $1000 is not any more stealing than stealing $1, but it is, in any court of law, more serious. If a friend loaned you her jacket and you found a quarter in the pocket, and meant to return it to her but forgot, most of us would probably shrug it off and not give it a 2nd thought. After all, it was only a quarter! But if it were a wad of $100 bills, and we 'forgot' to return it, that friend would be justifiably angry! So quantity does play a role.
For the record, I am 100% against putting music on the internet for download. I think we need to differentiate between offering the music for download vs downloading it yourself. Like the difference between selling drugs and using drugs.