Text 43291, 65 rader
Skriven 2008-02-16 01:46:12 av Jeff Bowman (1:229/500)
  Kommentar till text 43273 av James Bradley (1:134/77.0)
Ärende: Re: Discontent.
=======================
 
> You say your thing, and I see another. Either you need to question your
> allegiance, or I need glasses.
 
I'm not sure what you meant there, I have to admit!
 
 
> Am I *NOT* breaking the law, by copying a DOS 4 disk, and giving it to
> someone? Tom tells me a end user W98se CD was not even in existence until
> enough hot air was blown up Bill's skirt, and I'm supposed to believe his
> balls are made of gold? He can be the biggest philanthropist in history,
> ...
 
 
I perhaps have a fairly jaded view of what constitutes piracy, due to keeping
up with stuff like the most modern DRM, and what the music/movie industry says
is "legal" to do with media you buy, etc.
 
If you gave a copy of DOS or Windows to someone who didn't already own it, then
sure, that's illegal. But if you give them a copy, when they already own one,
then how can that really be illegal? You're just not using your original media
anymore, is all.  You still legally bought it regardless of how you're putting
it on a machine.  When I was in high school, I'd help the computer teachers out
with installing software and such, and when they bought applications, they'd
use one or two sets of discs for every machine in the classroom, while keeping
dozens of other copies still sealed up in the back room.  If they had had to
open every copy and keep track of which one was installed on each machine, that
would have been crazy.  And now, with the heavy use of license keys for
activating products, it further reinforces my opinion on the lack of importance
of the original media. 
 
I mean, had you personally made a backup copy of your disc years ago, and then
had to use that, would you consider that illegal?  If not, then how does that
differ at all from using someone elses backup copy?  A copy is a copy.
 
Meanwhile, the music and movie industry tries to dictate what you're allowed to
do with your discs. If you buy one, they say you're not allowed to make any
copies at all for any reason. Though the law states that you're allowed to do
that very thing under fair use.  So if I want to put some MP3s on a portable
music player to listen to in the car, even though I bought the CD, the music
industry still tells me that's illegal.  But I bought it, so I can do what I
want with it, can I not?  Them saying what I can and can't do with something I
paid for is like Microsoft trying to say that I'm not allowed to run any
non-Microsoft apps on my computer, despite the capability being there.  Or like
Ford saying you're not allowed to add or remove any parts from the car without
their permission, even to fix it yourself.
 
Anyway, I have no idea what your exact opinion is on such matters, but you seem
fairly aggravated about how you have to obtain the disc.  Not that I
particularly blame you.  But I don't personally feel that it makes you a thief
to reacquire a piece of media you need to use a product you already paid for,
and I hope you don't feel that way if that's what you have to do. I've done it,
I don't regret it, and if I ever got sued for it, I'd fight it.  
Basically, I don't let laws that were never meant to govern modern technology
determine how I use my property.  What constitutes "stealing" in the digital
world has been distorted by companies clinging to old ways to keep media from
being pirated, which only ever serves to hurt the average consumer more than
the pirate.
 
I'm sure I could rant more on the subject of copying and DRM, but I've already
digressed from the topic!  In any case, I hope you get your situation figured
out and the machine up and running.

--- D'Bridge 2.95
 * Origin: FyBBS (1:229/500)