Internet Censorship begins in America; 70 websites seized

[SemperFiUSMC]

It's almost comical how you self-righteous folks are completely circling and avoiding a question that you know will destroy your entire argument.

I've answered your question. You don't like the answer.

 

[steveh_131]

how am i self being self-righteous? i simple stated a fact. i never once questioned anybody's morals

I personally feel that you have violated the terms of my license agreement.

 

[38special]

so can you enlighten us as to why it is okay to take someones hard work without compensating them? that's what the courts have ruled on. the argument on the courts past regarding black people is irrelevant, white people owned slaves in the past, but that doesn't make us slave owners today.

Where, exactly, did I say it's ok to steal someones work? Making an argument based on something that was never said is pretty handy.

Why do you think it's ok to fight dogs? That's a pretty sick thing to believe. See how that works?

My point is simply that just because the "law" says something is wrong doesn't mean it actually is. Often, the law is wrong. I am NOT saying this with regard to stealing copyrighted works. I AM saying this with regard to seizing search engines. It sounds good, but it's largely based on lobbyists from record labels and not any real issue with right or wrong.

You may disagree - that's fine. My point is only that just because the government says it's wrong does not instantly make it wrong. Thus, the argument that courts have ruled this way or that's the law is fallacy in an argument on morals,etc.

The court ruled, and there it is. Reality. A big slap in the face.

I agree with you about abortion. But the other thing ... can you point me to the court ruling that black people are only worth 2/3 of a white person?

Courts aren't making the current law. It's the DMCA. Google it and read it.

If you had read the DMCA as I suggested, you would have the answer to your question. Website owners have qualified immunity as long as they have procedures in place to address copyright infringement. Be responsible? Stay in business. Engage in stealing? Get shut down.

It's all there in black and white. All you have to do is turn o the page and start reading.

I'm familiar with the DMCA.

My numbers were a bit off. It's 3/5 of a person. Three-fifths compromise - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, Plessy v. Ferguson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia separate but equal.

Obviously these are extreme examples. The point is just what I said above. Law or courts don't instantly mean it's ACTUALLY right or wrong.

 

[steveh_131]

I've answered your question. You don't like the answer.

No, you didn't. You've made the claim that it is "Stealing" if you distribute intellectual property.

If there was no law against it, would you still have a problem with piracy?

 

[steveh_131]

And by the way, you keep bringing up "License Agreements". The only people bound by a license agreement are the people who purchased it. If I download it, I am bound by no license agreement. Can I therefore share it with whoever I please?

 

[LEaSH]

there are also groups that think it is perfectly ok to have sexual relationships with children, but that doesn't change the fact that it is morally wrong and against the law.

I'll let your own words speak for you.
Please explain how your not judging anyone. While you're at it, help blend the line between a crime is a crime is a crime and pederasts and illegally sharing a copy of Sha Na Na's greatest Hits.

 

[sepe]

You'd be better off digging through the $1 cd bin at the gas station for the Sha Na Na greatest hits. When I tried to get a bootleg copy, I searched for days without finding anything. That was the day I gave up on trying to bootleg music or movies because if they don't have the complete works of a super group like Sha Na Na what can they really have?

 

[rjstew317]

I'll let your own words speak for you.
Please explain how your not judging anyone. While you're at it, help blend the line between a crime is a crime is a crime and pederasts and illegally sharing a copy of Sha Na Na's greatest Hits.

i still fail to see your argument

 

[machete]

there are also groups that think it is perfectly ok to have sexual relationships with children, but that doesn't change the fact that it is morally wrong and against the law.

Back to the starting line,,,how is it morally wrong???

 

[rjstew317]

I'll let your own words speak for you.
Please explain how your not judging anyone. While you're at it, help blend the line between a crime is a crime is a crime and pederasts and illegally sharing a copy of Sha Na Na's greatest Hits.

i'm not saying that if you steal a cd your no better then a pedrast, sorry for the confusion. what i am saying is that they are both crimes no matter how you justify them

 

[rjstew317]

Back to the starting line,,,how is it morally wrong???

if you don't know how being a pedophile is morally wrong then you have bigger problems.

 

[firehawk1]

Chiming in REALLY late here, and by no means an expert on legal matters but, I suppose you can argue if it's against the law or not, or if YOU THINK it should or shouldn't be, from your jail cell.

The law is the law. Just because someone disagree's WITH the law dosen't change it. There are people who believe there is nothing wrong with murdering someone. Dosen't matter WHAT they think, they WILL be locked up if caught. It's the law.

Deciding on one's own what THEY think is legal and what is not kinda' sounds at the least like situational ethics, and at the worst anarchy to me.

 

[machete]

You can't steal. It's against the law. It's been against the law before the law existed.

YESSSSS!!!!!! Now were getting somewhere...

Stealing has always been against the law...even without manmade law...but driving without a seatbelt is only against the law lately...

Is IP law found in the natural law--therefore immoral for all times and offensive to God-- or is it found in the manmade law which means it can change and God might not care about it???

And anyway,,,where is it right for the Department of Homeland Security to get involved with corporate websites????? These are no threat to our security!! Is DHS becoming the new KGB???? The new US Police weve all been worried would show up????

 

[machete]

if you don't know how being a pedophile is morally wrong then you have bigger problems.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[LEaSH]

You throw down some vileness like that and tell me I'm confused?

I see the phrase "morally wrong and against the law."

You're not judging though.

When you see what you've written you can dismiss it as confusion, but they are your words. Be a man and own them. Look at the rest of your posts while you're at it.

 

[Expat]

Chiming in REALLY late here, and by no means an expert on legal matters but, I suppose you can argue if it's against the law or not, or if YOU THINK it should or shouldn't be, from your jail cell.

The law is the law. Just because someone disagree's WITH the law dosen't change it. There are people who believe there is nothing wrong with murdering someone. Dosen't matter WHAT they think, they WILL be locked up if caught. It's the law.

Deciding on one's own what THEY think is legal and what is not kinda' sounds at the least like situational ethics, and at the worst anarchy to me.

Actually I would have more respect for the process if it was the government investigating and prosecuting. I just find these shakedown schemes very distasteful. They (RIAA/MPAA) are setting up entrapment schemes where they log IP addresses that connect to them to download their products. Then they turn them all over to a big law firm to extort large cash payments out of people.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Actually I would have more respect for the process if it was the government investigating and prosecuting. I just find these shakedown schemes very distasteful. They (RIAA/MPAA) are setting up entrapment schemes where they log IP addresses that connect to them to download their products. Then they turn them all over to a big law firm to extort large cash payments out of people.

I agree with you on RIAA & MPAA. Said so. But the fact they are empowered to act on behalf of their industries does not negate the fact that people steal and someone should stop it.

 

[rjstew317]

You throw down some vileness like that and tell me I'm confused?

I see the phrase "morally wrong and against the law."

You're not judging though.

When you see what you've written you can dismiss it as confusion, but they are your words. Be a man and own them. Look at the rest of your posts while you're at it.

seriously, now you question my manhood? stop being a child.

 

[LEaSH]

Just own up to what you post and don't try be dismissive of what you type.

Read your very own post a look at yourself is all I'm saying.

No need for name calling.

 

[firehawk1]

Actually I would have more respect for the process if it was the government investigating and prosecuting. I just find these shakedown schemes very distasteful. They (RIAA/MPAA) are setting up entrapment schemes where they log IP addresses that connect to them to download their products. Then they turn them all over to a big law firm to extort large cash payments out of people.

I have read every post in this thread and "somewhat" understand the OP's position... somewhat. BUT that dosen't change anything. As of NOW what these websites were engaged in is illegal. IMO all this God's law, Moral law, Man's law is irrelovent. One must live under the "law of the land"... mans's law I suppose.

The LAST thing we need to to bring "God" into it. Religion has screwed up more things, and more people than anything else in history. IMO