UK's Terrifying Anti-Piracy Plans Leak

[Apokalipse]

So drop the word "steal"... you still have an illegal act. It doesn't matter if you agree with a law or not, as telling a judge that you don't agree with a law will get you no leniency whatsoever. Breaking a law is breaking a law, no matter what that law is. you can argue in circles all day long but that will not change that one immutable fact.

Silly? Not at all. There are many laws I don't agree with, such as speed limits set way too low or not being allowed to go through a red light if there is no traffic. while I don't agree with them, I must still abide by them.

If everyone decided to stop abiding by the laws of the land and just do whatever they saw fit in their own eyes it would soon break down into pandemonium. Oh, I wouldn't, and most others wouldn't, but there would be a few who would cast aside all restraint and wreak havoc. It is these few that are the cause for the majority of the laws on the books.

You seem to think that if we don't want to obey all laws, it's equivalent to not obeying any laws. That is a far cry.
I am saying people should take a good look at the laws in place to see if they make sense, because not all of them do.

If people never sought to change the legal system, we'd probably be living under a dictatorship, and with poor human rights.

Terms don't mean jack. Don't you get that? If a person can acquire said software/song without paying, they will.

That's a hasty generalisation.
The people who would copy regardless of whether there was a system that made sense probably do not share my worldview.
Even so, it's besides the point. If the system doesn't make sense, it doesn't make sense.

If a system was put in place that did make sense, even if people did still copy software/media, it would be at an extremely reduced level.

This should be true, but it is not a lot of the time.

Because the system is broken.

I so wish you would get that bug out of your anus. Illegal is illegal, whether there is a PHYSICAL LOSS OR NOT.

Because people defined it as being so; that doesn't mean it makes sense.

You can preach this all you want but Bubba will still wallow out your pooper in the slammer for it.

Along with a few billion other people in the world.

 

[S0ULphIRE]

You seem to think that if we don't want to obey all laws, it's equivalent to not obeying any laws. That is a far cry.
I am saying people should take a good look at the laws in place to see if they make sense, because not all of them do.

If people never sought to change the legal system, we'd probably be living under a dictatorship, and with poor human rights.

That's not at all what he was saying, and you know it. Don't try to twist things out of proportion. He was saying, as I did earlier on, you can't selectively choose which laws you will follow.
If everyone did what you do, that is choose the laws they agree with and follow them and ignore the others, then the world would be in chaos. Some people might decide they think rape is ok, some might decide they think pirating is ok. Eventually you'd get a bunch of people who, collectively, think everything is ok and nothing is ok.

IF you disagree with a certain law that's fine. IF you want to change it you can vote about it. That's what democracy is about, in case you'd forgotten.
People are FREE to take 'a good look at the law'. Millions of people do regularly, I can assure you. They can even change it, if enough of them agree.

It sounds like you're ****ed off because you're part of a minority group who thinks copying software for nothing should be allowed, and because that group is so small the law isn't changed. How's that logic fit wit you?

 

[Apokalipse]

That's not at all what he was saying, and you know it. Don't try to twist things out of proportion. He was saying, as I did earlier on, you can't selectively choose which laws you will follow.
If everyone did what you do, that is choose the laws they agree with and follow them and ignore the others, then the world would be in chaos.

That would only be true if the laws people choose to follow were purely random. My decisions on what laws I agree with aren't. They're logic-based.
I agree with laws that actually make sense, and don't agree with laws that don't make sense.
When people write the laws, they should do the same thing. But they don't, so I have a right to call them out on it.

It sounds like you're ****ed off because you're part of a minority group who thinks copying software for nothing should be allowed, and because that group is so small the law isn't changed. How's that logic fit wit you?

No, I'm annoyed at people that make strawman arguments about people like me.
The fact is, too much power is put into the hands of these anti-piracy groups, not only to change laws as they see fit, but to control all the terms and prices.
If normal people had the ability to have a say in the terms and cost, such that they were actually reasonable, the amount of copying without payment would be reduced by orders of magnitude.

IF you disagree with a certain law that's fine. IF you want to change it you can vote about it. That's what democracy is about, in case you'd forgotten.

We tent to have the option of voting between about 2-3 groups of people. That's all. We don't get to choose the laws. And these groups aren't going to change the laws on copying software for us. Not unless we we make a lot of noise about it and get one group to listen, so we can choose to vote for them. That's how democracy works in practice.

Yeah, it's the best system we've had so far, but it's still far from perfect.

 

[S0ULphIRE]

That would only be true if the laws people choose to follow were purely random. My decisions on what laws I agree with aren't. They're logic-based.

Not at all. People as a group can act in an illogical manner. Those people wouldn't agree on all decisions, even if they were perfectly logical. Therefore what I said before stands.

I agree with laws that actually make sense, and don't agree with laws that don't make sense.
When people write the laws, they should do the same thing. But they don't, so I have a right to call them out on it.

You're still missing the point that you're going about this in an illegal way. There exists a legal, accepted method to 'call out' the laws you don't agree with.

The fact is, too much power is put into the hands of these anti-piracy groups, not only to change laws as they see fit, but to control all the terms and prices.

In your opinion. And coming from someone who is pro-piracy, that's not surprising.

If normal people had the ability to have a say in the terms and cost, such that they were actually reasonable, the amount of copying without payment would be reduced by orders of magnitude.

According to who? What do you back that statement up with, or is it just talk?

 

[Trotter]

I have closed the thread and it will remain closed. This is a prime example of why we don't allow certain discussions; while this wasn't on religion or sex (and just touched on politics) it has moved well out of the realm of what is wanted here.

The laws of the land are there whether one agrees with them or not. If anyone is displeased with them, work to change them.