[OT] but concerns all of us

Christopher J. Ruwe cjr at cruwe.de
Thu Nov 17 18:57:14 UTC 2011

On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 12:56:06 -0500
Jerry <jerry at seibercom.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 10:17:50 -0700
> Chad Perrin articulated:
> > Copyright infringement is copyright infringement -- and not theft --
> > no matter how hyperbolic your choice of phrasing.  Castigate people
> > for the unlawful act of copyright infringement if you want to, but
> > please do not conflate two separate bodies of law by equating one
> > illegal act with another.  This abuse of terms is largely the fault
> > of media conglomerates and their lobbying organizations (e.g. the
> > RIAA and MPAA).  The more you repeat these abuses of terminology,
> > the more they are emboldened; I think it was the RIAA
> > representative at the SOPA hearing yesterday who literally equated
> > copyright infringement with *murder*.
> > 
> > Don't be like that jackass.
> Yes, you must be one of those scumbags that pilfers the property or
> intellectual rights of others sans payment or having acquired the
> legal rights to the property and then tries to hide behind some pseudo
> Divine-Right bullshit. You can fool yourself into believing that
> running someone over with a car and killing them is Vehicular
> manslaughter and not 1st degree murder; however, that does not change
> one iota the simple fact that the victim is dead.
> You can try an justify your illegal actions all you want; criminal
> attorneys make a living out of doing it in court everyday of the week.
> It amazes me how scumbags constantly attempt to justify their illegal
> actions. The simple fact is that a thief is a thief no matter how you
> try and sugar coat it.
> Now go back and play your pirated music, etcetera. I am sure you have
> all ready justified that practice to yourself.

For christ's sake stop your crusade, please. I do not know if and if, who hurt you, but that issue is certainly not adressed by accusing possibly, or better, almost certainly, innocent people of illegal and/or criminal actions.

Civil liberties are a protection of citizens against their state. Should you entertain the notion that states are by their very nature trustworthy, have a look at some failed states in the recent eighty years. States are represented by human beings who do, more often than one would wish to, succumb to the temptation of crime themselves. Should you require something more illustrating, viz., not theoretical, I fullheartedly suggest reading a most outstanding author, Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn, Archipelago Gulag. You might develop a more moderate approach to that "libertinistic scumbags" who demand protection from legislation which is increasingly becoming a loose
cannon on the deck. BTW, using increasingly foul language against arguments people of different persuasion make is a telltale sign ... of Chekism.

Feel free to stand for your point and oppose other's, but do that reasonably and respectfully. 
Christopher J. Ruwe
TZ GMT + 1

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list