If I pirate software the developer/publisher has not lost any more money than if I had not pirated it and chosen another product or no product at all. Is it now theft to choose a competing product as well? What isn't theft, buying everything? Do explain your rationale. So far most anti-piracy arguments here are all based on morality and sensationalism (ie. calling it theft when it's copyright infringement). Is it not possible to argue against piracy using logic instead? I should think it is, since I've done it several times on XtremeSystems.FedoraRefugee wrote:
I prefer not to argue based on ethics because it's a fundamentally failed argument from the start. I can call something ethical from one perspective and unethical from another. Ethics have no standard criteria with which to evaluate something.
EDIT: Just FYI, I'm not dismissing your moral objections to copyright infringement, I'm just not interested in debating on moral grounds because it just won't go anywhere. I do, however, object to the use of the terms "theft" and "stealing" because if you use those incorrect terms in a debate with piracy advocates you end up arguing purely whether piracy is theft or not (as we are now and I'm not even a piracy advocate ), rather than whether it is justifiable or not.
I am talking about software written by developers who are not paid. Do I steal from Kendall Weaver by using Peppermint OS?hinto wrote: Actually it is. People get paid by their employer because they (the people) give up time in order to make the employer money (make the company profitable). The employer pays them according to how much their (the employee's) time is worth.