daz@undertaker.homeip.net wrote:
> nah.  Ill call it what it is.  theft.  If somebody is selling something 
> and I take that something without paying for it, that is theft.  it does 
> not matter what it is.  i.e.  if I use my friends copy of WinXP on my box 
> without paying for it, its theft.  If I get permission from MS to do this, 
> it is no longer theft because they gave it to me.

Be careful of your definitions.  The generic use of "theft" as you use 
above is not entirely correct.  Theft implies that you are depriving 
someone of the ability to use the item stolen.  If I steal your wheel 
barrow, you cannot use it anymore.

This is not true for intellectual property (i.e. software).  When you 
use software that is not licensed, you are infringing on copyright, not 
stealing.  The maker still has access to the "stolen" property.  If I 
photographed the plans to build a wheel barrow, you can still use the 
plans to build one yourself.  While infringing upon copyright may 
depriving the maker from revenue and be morally wrong, it is copyright 
or patent infringement, not theft or stealing.

Why do I nitpick on this point?  Too many people think that physical 
property laws apply equally to intellectual property space.  This is not 
and cannot be the case due to inherent differences in their beings.  We 
need to educate people to think differently about intellectual property 
or we will never gain any ground in the fight for the free flow of 
information and ideas.


-- 
Chris Lewis
shadow@digitalnirvana.com
----------------------------------------
If it compiles, it is good, if it boots up it is perfect.
       - Linus Torvalds
----------------------------------------