Homestar Runner Wiki Forum
http://forum.hrwiki.org/

Breaking "stupid" laws -- right, wrong, depends?
http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=11726		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  furrykef [ Thu Jun 21, 2007 12:48 am ]
Post subject:  Breaking "stupid" laws -- right, wrong, depends?
A couple of months ago, one of the posters here said in some thread or other that you can't just break a law merely because the law is stupid. Remembering that discussion, combined with something I'm doing right now, inspired this thread...

Monday this week I ordered a book: Remembering the Kanji, Volume I, by James Heisig. It's a book to help me remember the various characters used in Japanese, called kanji, and there are over 2000 of them. The book hasn't arrived yet. But anyway, today I illegally downloaded the book because I found that a particular task -- downloading stroke order diagrams of the kanji -- is much easier and more bearable if I can simply copy and paste every kanji from the PDF file in order. A benign crime, because I've already paid for the book and this only provides a one-time convenience that I wouldn't pay for anyway. Moreover, if I had an OCR scanner myself, it would not be illegal to use the book for this purpose (even though the extra work of using an OCR scanner rather ruins the point of this, which is convenience). You can't easily write exceptions into the law for cases like this. The law would get hopelessly complex, when laws are complex enough as it is. So it's hardly surprising that such a thing isn't legal, even though I can't see any reason that it should be punishable.

In addition, I downloaded in the same archives volumes 2 and 3, which I did not order and currently do not have any intention to order. I am not planning to actually use these books: I only downloaded them because it was easier to download them all than to download them separately, and I wanted to see if it would be worth it to buy them. It would be like flipping through it at the bookstore or the library. So why am I not flipping through them at the bookstore or the library? Well, because my bookstore and library don't have them, of course. Why should I let that get in way? It wouldn't be sensible to buy such a thing without getting to preview it first. I have every intention of paying for them if I'm going to use them, and deleting them if not. But it's technically illegal. It's less benign than downloading Volume 1 since I haven't ordered a legal copy, but it's still benign since it's not the same as outright stealing, either. It's far from depriving the author of his livelihood, even if everybody did exactly the same as I'm doing.

Notice I didn't say anything about downloading stuff like MP3s or ROMs. That's a fuzzier and more complicated matter, so I think it's a discussion for another time. I'm also not mentioning civil disobedience along the lines of Thoreau or Gandhi, because few would disagree with them.

Now, in cases like the two I described above -- downloading a book I own for temporary convenience, and downloading a book I do not own for previewing but not for use -- what do you think is the right thing to do? Respect the letter of the law and not break it, or just go ahead and do it, believing that it breaks the letter but not the spirit?

- Kef
Author:  Didymus [ Thu Jun 21, 2007 1:02 am ]
Post subject: 
Here's what I'd say:

In the case of the book you have paid for but not yet received, downloading a PDF is perfectly legitimate, in my own opinion. I mean, it's not like you're going to use the PDF to duplicate thousands of pirate copies to sell.

In the case of the other two volumes, I'd say peruse them as a trial, then either delete them or order copies of them, too. Either that, or contact the author and arrange maybe some sort of direct compensation.

In the case of movies and mp3's, my philosophy is that, if you own the originals, you should be permitted to make copies of them just in case the original wears out, or to put them into a format you prefer (for example, if you like to adjust volume levels or balance out the EQ - I know I do). It annoys me that both the music industry and the video industry are doing everything they humanly can to prevent users from making legitimate copies of their media.
Author:  PianoManGidley [ Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:18 am ]
Post subject: 
Music directors often run into similar quandries when debating whether or not to photocopy sheet music for a performance. In my junior year in college, my band director took an old, old piece out of the archives for us to revive and play again. The only thing is, the pages had been around for so long that they were worn and torn, with many parts difficult to read and/or at risk of simply falling apart in one's hands. So my band director photocopied nearly every page (a very select few were still usable), which is illegal by the letter of the law. However, the intent behind his actions were not malicious in any way, as he was not planning on illegally distributing the sheet music or anything. He was never planning on performing an illegal action which was the reason to place this preventative law in the books in the first place. So, as you stated, Kef, and as he put it, it broke the letter of the law, but not the spirit of the law.

A measure of following the letter of the law without regard to intent or spirit, IMO, is as brainless as "zero tolerance" application of rules and procedures, which inevitably punish someone simply for what they might do (which CAN be harmful either physically, psychologically, or in this case fiscally). To understand the spirit of the law is why so many people spend so many years studying law to become a lawyer or a judge.

I would also add that it seems only in the 20th Century did we see such rise to laws regarding copyright infringement and such. It's purely a product of Capitalism, since it was part of a long-standing set of social mores to feel that someone copying your work was not theft, but appreciation. The only problem is that we've become more greedy and egotistical and far less mannered. Instead of copying someone else's work to show how great we think they are, it is much more common to present another's work as your own in an attempt to promote your own social standing and popularity. Oh, well...
Author:  Simon Zeno [ Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:28 am ]
Post subject: 
Personally, I say that as long as you're downloading something that you've either already bought or have no intention of ever buying, it's all right.

But then, I don't really have a whole lot of "morals".
Author:  Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest [ Thu Jun 21, 2007 11:07 am ]
Post subject: 
Heres a thought: Has the hammer come battering down your door? No? Good, keep it and tell no one.
Author:  DukeNuke [ Thu Jun 21, 2007 11:39 am ]
Post subject: 
Anything that can be describes as information and put in digital form, that is, things like music, movies, pictures, books etc, can be send across the internet or other media, like CDs. I think don't think it's relevant if copying such information should be leagal or not, because preventing it from happening simply doesn't work. The police can't check what you have on your computer unless they suspect you for something that would get you in jail. Heck, even if they monitored 100% of the internet, people could still send stuff to eachother by using cryptography and/or stenography.

You're probably thinking "But what about all the artists? They need money for food etc.". Well, tough. They'll simply have to rethink how they sell their stuff. Rather than just selling information in the old fashioned way, you'll have to do something like provide a service that cannot be reproduced easily, like Google's search with ads, World of Warcraft's servers with monthly fees for accounts, or such. You can also do something in a way that people will pay for it and support it just because they like it, like H*R with their T-shirts and stuff, or the Linux community with volunteering programmers, moderators, servers etc.

I know it's not exactly easy, but people will have to come up with things like that, or get another job. And I don't think it would be catastropic, like, there'd be no more people making movies, music, etc. I mean, radio still exists even though nobody pays for listening to it. Part of taxes go to radio instead. Didn't somebody suggest that part of the cost for CDs and internet connection should go to music artists? We're entering the information age, and things will simply have to change. You can't prevent people from copying information anymore, it's just impossible.
Author:  Didymus [ Thu Jun 21, 2007 3:09 pm ]
Post subject: 
I agree that the industry needs to rethink how it sells its products and makes money off of them. Gone are the days when people lined up at record stores to buy the latest LP's on vinyl or 8-track, and the music industry just needs to deal with this new market on its own terms.

The problem is, they have. It's called "VISTA: the new Microsoft Operating System with Built-In RIAA Spyware! We clog up your system resources so fat record company execs can continue to make more money off you, Even If All Your Music Is Legit!" Now, I'm no bootleg music pirate. The vast majority of my mp3's are from independent artists who make their music available over the web. But I simply detest the idea of Darth Bill making another lousy operating system for no other reason than to clog up my box with anti-piracy software. Let's just say I'll be hanging on to my XP install disks just in case.
Author:  PianoManGidley [ Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:46 pm ]
Post subject: 
Didymus wrote:
But I simply detest the idea of Darth Bill making another lousy operating system for no other reason than to clog up my box with anti-piracy software. Let's just say I'll be hanging on to my XP install disks just in case.


Dude...you should get a Dell.
Author:  furrykef [ Thu Jun 21, 2007 11:28 pm ]
Post subject: 
Since when do you need a Dell to install Ubuntu? Runs fine on my PC. ;)

Let's try to get back to the topic, though. This isn't about copying, it's about breaking the law in benign ways.

- Kef
Author:  Amorican [ Fri Jun 22, 2007 1:45 am ]
Post subject: 
DukeNuke wrote:
I mean, radio still exists even though nobody pays for listening to it. Part of taxes go to radio instead.


What? Where are you from? Are you referring specifically to public radio? Cuz where I'm from, radio is payed for by advertising.

Also kinda off topic, I love walking into record stores and buying music that way. I will be very sad when that is finally taken away from me. I feel when I am illegally downloading a song, I am helping to kill something that I love. So I don't do it anymore. That's also why I don't buy songs from iTunes or anything like that either. Record stores are magical places for me. I've started a collection of vinyl records and that has made it even more fun. Are the laws stupid and should they be broken in this case? I don't know.

In your particular case, since you bought the book anyway, I don't think there's too much of a problem for the first volume. The second/third volumes, I just don't know.

I think there should be a sort of risk assessment associated with breaking laws, even in benign ways. Am I willing to go to prison to prove my point that a particular law is stupid? Am I willing to pay an outrageous fee or fine? Am I willing to risk lawsuit from a book publisher or the RIAA? For me, in these cases, the answer is no. I have better things to do with my time than risk any of these things. I leave that to people who are willing to take those risks, and who will accept the consequences if things go wrong.
Author:  StrongRad [ Fri Jun 22, 2007 2:33 am ]
Post subject: 
Amorican wrote:
Also kinda off topic, I love walking into record stores and buying music that way. I will be very sad when that is finally taken away from me. I feel when I am illegally downloading a song, I am helping to kill something that I love.

It's rare to find someone that agrees with me on this. There's just something special about a tangible piece of music. I love the way a new CD smells. I love reading the liner notes and looking at all of the strange pictures. I love the "thank you"s.
You just don't get that with downloads.
I'm the same way with paychecks. I hate "direct deposit". I love holding the check. There's just something about it. Unfortunately, I have to do direct deposit (it's part of government jobs). Now, to avoid getting WAAAAAY off topic;

Amorican wrote:
I think there should be a sort of risk assessment associated with breaking laws, even in benign ways. Am I willing to go to prison to prove my point that a particular law is stupid? Am I willing to pay an outrageous fee or fine? Am I willing to risk lawsuit from a book publisher or the RIAA? For me, in these cases, the answer is no. I have better things to do with my time than risk any of these things. I leave that to people who are willing to take those risks, and who will accept the consequences if things go wrong.

The problem is, a lot of people aren't willing to accept the consequences. They'll whine and complain when they get busted for something they know is illegal.
Illegal is just that, illegal. There's nothing wrong with questioning authority and/or unjust laws, but you should know that you're still breaking the law and should expect to face the consequences for doing so.
I'm sure I'll be called a mindless sheep for saying this, but I don't care. I'll be a mindless sheep on the right side of the law. Beats being Paris Hilton.
If you have a problem with a law, talk to your representative/senator/state representative/state senator/governor. We DO live in what people call a democracy, after all. Even in a fake democracy, the people get what they want every now and then.
Author:  furrykef [ Fri Jun 22, 2007 3:40 am ]
Post subject: 
But what if nothing can be done with the law, as in my examples? You can't expect them to write in exceptions to the laws for those two cases. That's not because the exceptions aren't a good idea, it's because that it would make the law hopelessly complex. You can't put every single dang situation that will ever arise into the law.

Moreover, even if I could write to my congressman about my situation, my situation would be resolved before he ever read the letter, let alone by the time such a law would pass in the unlikely event that it would.

- Kef
Author:  bwave [ Sun Jun 24, 2007 11:53 pm ]
Post subject: 
I agree with what amorican says. I love walking into the store, looking around, checking stuff out, etc. One thing I like about going into the store is that I can accidentally find good music. I can just turn around and find a good cd right there.

Online, everything is systematic, and just doesnt have the same feel to ity when looking for stuff.

Also, I have no idea why, but I like to eat the paper inserts on new cds. Its something I cant figure out why. It's like a bad habit. Maybe they just use really good ink or something. I kinda started when I was young and liked to sniff new paper products (pokemon cards, magazines, video game instruction manuals, and cd inserts.) Anyways, I hope I'll have that forever.
Author:  Amorican [ Mon Jun 25, 2007 10:12 pm ]
Post subject: 
bwave wrote:
I agree with what amorican says. I love walking into the store, looking around, checking stuff out, etc. One thing I like about going into the store is that I can accidentally find good music. I can just turn around and find a good cd right there.

Online, everything is systematic, and just doesnt have the same feel to ity when looking for stuff.

Also, I have no idea why, but I like to eat the paper inserts on new cds. Its something I cant figure out why. It's like a bad habit. Maybe they just use really good ink or something. I kinda started when I was young and liked to sniff new paper products (pokemon cards, magazines, video game instruction manuals, and cd inserts.) Anyways, I hope I'll have that forever.


Are you mocking me? :p

Maybe I'm just spoiled by the fact that I live 5 minutes from an Amoeba Music store. That is such a wonderful place. Their selection of vinyl records could keep me there for hours.

Sometimes I think I was born about 30 years too late. If I had the option of trading places with my dad, I would do it in a second.
Author:  Didymus [ Mon Jun 25, 2007 10:26 pm ]
Post subject: 
Meanwhile, the only decent place in Cleveland MS to buy CD's is Wal-Mart. Unless there's some back-hole mom and pop I don't know about. But I doubt it.

When I lived in Atlanta, Tower Records was the place for me. It had an entire room - a room, mind you, not a section - dedicated to classical music. Of course, it also carried vinyl as well as CD's, and I could peruse the DJ mixes of a lot of my favorite songs. But, alas, those days are long over. If I want music now, it's interwebs or freaking forget it.

Incidentally, I downloaded The Wall earlier today. Thanks to Cola, I've been wanting to listen to it, and my PF CD's are somewhere at my mom's house in Georgia.
Author:  Amorican [ Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:02 pm ]
Post subject: 
Didymus wrote:
Meanwhile, the only decent place in Cleveland MS to buy CD's is Wal-Mart. Unless there's some back-hole mom and pop I don't know about. But I doubt it.

When I lived in Atlanta, Tower Records was the place for me. It had an entire room - a room, mind you, not a section - dedicated to classical music. Of course, it also carried vinyl as well as CD's, and I could peruse the DJ mixes of a lot of my favorite songs. But, alas, those days are long over. If I want music now, it's interwebs or freaking forget it.

Incidentally, I downloaded The Wall earlier today. Thanks to Cola, I've been wanting to listen to it, and my PF CD's are somewhere at my mom's house in Georgia.


Sorry this got so off track. I think downloading for free is fine if you already own the music. I think if you buy a piece of music in a store or itunes or something, it should come with some sort of receipt or proof of purchase that automatically allows you to download that same piece of music from any site which and give you immunity from lawsuits over that piece of music. That way if you are miles away from your copy of The Wall and you want to hear it, you don't have to worry about The Man coming down on you. I don't imagine this being logistically possible though. Just an idea. But then the same idea could apply to furrykef and his book.

RIP Tower Records. You overpriced but wonderful place.
Author:  Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest [ Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:08 pm ]
Post subject: 
Didymus wrote:
Meanwhile, the only decent place in Cleveland MS to buy CD's is Wal-Mart. Unless there's some back-hole mom and pop I don't know about. But I doubt it.

When I lived in Atlanta, Tower Records was the place for me. It had an entire room - a room, mind you, not a section - dedicated to classical music. Of course, it also carried vinyl as well as CD's, and I could peruse the DJ mixes of a lot of my favorite songs. But, alas, those days are long over. If I want music now, it's interwebs or freaking forget it.

Incidentally, I downloaded The Wall earlier today. Thanks to Cola, I've been wanting to listen to it, and my PF CD's are somewhere at my mom's house in Georgia.
I'm changing lives by doing what I do everyday!
Author:  PianoManGidley [ Tue Jun 26, 2007 11:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
Amorican wrote:
I think if you buy a piece of music in a store or itunes or something, it should come with some sort of receipt or proof of purchase that automatically allows you to download that same piece of music from any site which and give you immunity from lawsuits over that piece of music. That way if you are miles away from your copy of The Wall and you want to hear it, you don't have to worry about The Man coming down on you. I don't imagine this being logistically possible though. Just an idea.


Nah...it'd have to be some number or something, which people would just share online, like serial codes for software so you can upgrade from the demo version to the full version. I realized this when I was wondering why Wizards of the Coast didn't do the same thing with buying physical Magic the Gathering decks and then being able to download the same deck into your Magic Online account.
Author:  Marshmallow Roast [ Wed Jun 27, 2007 12:27 am ]
Post subject: 
My personal policy is this...

It is okay to break a law if:
A ) there is absolutely NO WAY at ALL that your actions will have a negative effect on anyone, and
B ) if nobody of authority is there to see you do it.

Obviously, laws are created with the intention of upholding justice and preventing people from being harmed. But in some cases, such as this one with the downloaded book, there's no reason to obey a law that just gets in the way of convenience.

The "B" part may seem a bit... well, you know, but it's mainly just saying that I'm not going to download the book with the copyright police standing there watching me do it.
Author:  Linz [ Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
This brings up another question:
How is illegally downloading say, a single song, any different from recording one from the radio? Many stations encourage recording shows and music, and I've never really heard anyone say that recording from the radio is wrong. Same with taping shows on TV.
Author:  PianoManGidley [ Mon Jul 16, 2007 11:32 pm ]
Post subject: 
Linz wrote:
This brings up another question:
How is illegally downloading say, a single song, any different from recording one from the radio? Many stations encourage recording shows and music, and I've never really heard anyone say that recording from the radio is wrong. Same with taping shows on TV.


I dunno...may have something to do with the broadcasting policies or something. I mean, you're likely going to tape commercials and other things you don't like in the process, right? Which is basically free advertising for the companies that pay the stations. I think you're still supposed to have consent, though, or else this is what might happen.
Author:  furrykef [ Mon Jul 16, 2007 11:40 pm ]
Post subject: 
I still think issues like downloading music are a topic for another thread...
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/