Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Before responding to Larry

Subject: [OM] Re: Before responding to Larry
From: "Barry B. Bean" <bbbean@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 09:28:47 -0500
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 18:35:32 +0100, Christos Stavrou wrote:

>Dear Barry,

>I enjoyed your reply and I think I understand where you are coming
>from, but I'm afraid that it has some fundamental flaws. It uses alot
>of 'common-sense' arguments, which like all common-sense logic, they
>are very superficial and rather biased to be convincing.

>Just one example, you say:
>>> If we're dealing with right and wrong, then there's no question
>whatsoever. Stealing is >> >> wrong.

>I'm sorry but things are not so simple.

I respectfully disagree.

>To make it more clear  think for example "killing". Is killing wrong?
>Sure, you might say... but is it wrong in a war? Ooops.. now we can
>all start to see how complicated things are! ..

Wrong analogy. To make your analogy correct, we'd have to change the word 
stealing to taking. Sure, sometimes its ok to take things, just as it is 
sometimes justified to kill. But stealing is always 
wrong, as is murder.


>Even the 'right of property' that you seem to take it for granted, is
>a social construct, a very recent one in fact. 'Owenership' was
>constructed lately, in historical terms, as the fundamental base of
>western societies... and certainly it does not entail anything natural
>or moral or immoral in itself.

LOL! Try to take a bone from a hungry dog and tell me that the concept of 
property isn't part of nature!

> In fact many people would say that as
>many advantages has brought to the world, so many -if actually not
>more- are its unjust and dangerous consequences...

There are communes for people who feel that way. Interestingly, though, those 
communities always seem to have fences to keep the neighbors out. Wonder why... 

>All this, makes clear that there are no black and white sides, as you
>seem to believe. 

You need to hone your arguments to make that claim.

>As Manuel did, I also try to stress the pecularities, the nuances and
>delicate balances entailed in the Law, which can not be reduced in a
>simplistic 'this is stealing' or 'this is wrong'. 

I disagree. Pirating Photoshop is a very clear violation of copyright law.

>Finally, one other thing you seem to underestimate in Manuel's
>argument is the social benefits involved in relaxed conditions about
>intellectual properties. Just to offer an example and finish here: If
>the internet was patented by its creator, you and me and all of us we
>were probably not going to have this inspiring discussion :)

I'm not prepared to abandon capitalism because youand Manuel don't see a 
problem with software piracy. Whether capitalism should or should not define 
cultural norms is a discussion for another 
time and another forum. In the meantime, its as much a fact of life as rain. 
You may not like the rain, but if you go outside during a storm, you're getting 
wet.


--
Barry B. Bean
Bean & Bean Cotton Company
Peach Orchard, MO
www.beancotton.com
www.beanformissouri.org



==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz