FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.

» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Kubuntu User

LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04-30-2008, 03:33 PM
Eduardo Robles Elvira
Default OT: Citing

El Miércoles 30 Abril 2008, Derek Broughton escribió:
> Unfortunately Thomas Jefferson didn't write the Berne convention. *Don't be
> stupid.
> <plonk>

Berne Convention doesn't stablish what is theft and what is not. Neither it
stablishes what is conceptualy wrong. And please oh please don't insult other
people when you don't share their opinions. That's not a valid argument in
any dicussion, and it's a long stablished fallacy: argumentum ad hominem

El Miércoles 30 Abril 2008, Ignazio Palmisano escribió:
> Good point but this is not about the broadcasting of copyrighted
> material being right or wrong in absolute terms, this is about it being
> legal. My guess about copyright laws is that they enable the original
> source to say: thou shalt not broadcast this. Whether this is right or
> wrong, it's still their legal right to say so. A wrong law does not make
> legal to break it, a wrong law is reason for those who think it wrong to
> stand and make their opinion heard, voting for the law to be changed or
> otherwise acting, but breaking the law is breaking the law anyway. At
> least this is my reading of how Thoreau describes civil disobedience;
> that does not involve impunity if the law is broken.

I read "theft" and I find that term to be wrong. And Derek was indeed talking
about right or wrong. He might or might not differentiate right-wrong and
legal-illegal in that email, but I do. Go back to my first email and see what
I quoted from him:
El Miércoles 30 Abril 2008, Derek Broughton escribió:
> Perhaps not, but I find it distressing - and blame OSS for part of it -
> that people consider it perfectly alright to steal somebody else's
> intellectual property without a second thought. What you did is theft.
> Citing it doesn't make it right. Unfortunately, we're all so used to
> freely sharing software and documentation - legally - that many people
> can't differentiate between what they can copy and what they can't.

So yes, he was explaining what he found distressing, and that's why I point
that in the right-wrong plane (and NOT in the legal- ilegal plane), using the
word "theft" (or "steal" or anything like that) is wrong - it doesn't make
sense. It's actually using the terminology created by RIAA & company, which
of course ends up making you think like them, unsurprisingly. It's a trap.

El Miércoles 30 Abril 2008, Michael Leone escribió:
> Here's the concept that you're missing ..
> Doesn't matter what Thomas Jefferson thinks. Doesn't matter what
> *anyone* thinks. It can still be illegal.

Here is the concept you are missing... I haven't said wether it was illegal or
not. I was not talking about that and it doesn't matter to me, because saying
theft is still conceptually wrong. Here in Spain and in the USA too, no
matter which law is applied. I have only said that "theft" is not an
appropiate word in this case for the argument Derek was creating, as I have
explained above.

Eduardo Robles Elvira.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress
depends on the unreasonable man." (George Bernard Shaw)
kubuntu-users mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-users

Thread Tools

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:50 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org