Article:  |
File Sharing Without the Fear | |
| Subject: | Another Way to stay off the RIAA radar | |
| Date: | 2003-10-23 15:35:53 | |
| From: | anonymous2 | |
|
Response to: Another Way to stay off the RIAA radar
|
||
| Sure the laws need your agreement... You must elect the shit-head that makes it... | ||
Showing messages 1 through 9 of 9.
-
Another Way to stay off the RIAA radar
2003-10-24 20:03:43 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
On the contrary, you do not have to elect anyone. You are free not to vote. Whether you vote or not, and whether your candidate wins or not, you still have to obey the law whether you agree with it or not. If you do not obey the law, and you get caught, you will face the consequences regardless of how you feel about it. That's what it means to say that the law demands compliance, not agreement. -
Another Way to stay off the RIAA radar
2003-10-25 05:36:15 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
This is true, I amso might add, it's rare that those actually affected by a law have the oppertunity to vote on it directly, and anymore there is no technical reson why the average Joe Blow could not directly participate in such things (hell by using modern technoligy, odviously with some sort of secured connection, it could be done in just a few seconds of your time, right from your bedroom!) - but I would be willing to bet that if you took a survay on the matter - I think you would find that the majarity have either no opion at all, or simply do not feel that this activity is wrong in anyway, with those that feel it is stealing being left in a fairly low minnaritty. -
Another Way to stay off the RIAA radar
2003-10-25 23:23:03 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
I'm not so sure that a survey of the public at large would bear out your intuitions. You might be surprised. Also, whether what you want to do is stealing is simply a legal question. Stealing is unlawful taking, and under the prevailing laws copyright violation is stealing regardless of how one feels about it. Now, whether it is wrong is a different matter: that is an ethical question. The law might be less than fully just. But in the light of such important ethical issues as whether their is a right to healthcare, or a right to privacy (abortion, homosexuality), or whether it was just to invade Iraq, and so on, quibbling over whther one might possibly be justified in stealing tunes seems hopelessly shallow and self-indulgent. -
Another Way to stay off the RIAA radar
2003-10-27 00:41:59 anonymous2 [Reply | View]
You are right, it really dose come down to more of an ethical question than anything else, and at this point, I highly doubt the question would be re-opened to the general public. But how ethical is this (actually happened to someone I know) - An independant musician with no contract anywhere gave verbal consent (nothing in writting) to distribute his work (I was there at the time, so I heard him say it was o.k. at least for those couple soungs, even gave us both MP3s that he himself had made of his work) - then later he got angree with this other guy (fortunately not me) and threatened to sue! - Nothing ever happened, but would you call just that threat ethical - after verbal permission was already granted!?? (All he cared about at the time was getting his work out there, and did not want to sign any contracts, reguardless of how favorible to hime they were)- Now I knew this guy (the musician) since highschool. and I say at best that was just plain being an a**hole. But I have to admit, he is not that bright anyway - he drooped out of school with only 2 months left to go in his senior year, and had enough credits that he litteraly would have graduated if he did nothing at all in those 2 months except show up!.......
