rad5cap
RadCap
rad5cap

“It’s not theft, guys. ... That’s not my opinion, that’s a ruling from the Supreme Court. You may infer from their name that, at least in the USA, they are the highest court in the land.”

And so their conclusions are unquestionable and can never be challenged? That explains why slavery is still legal. LOL

“ruled that copyright infringement is not theft”

It is properly recognized as a category of theft. It is the disposing of the effort of another absent the consent of that other. Embezzlement, fraud, and copyright violation all are different categories of this same violation: theft.

“most people realize sharing copies of something someone else bought shouldn’t be illegal” because apparently these people think slavery shouldn’t be illegal. One shouldn’t have to get permission of another to dictate how their life and effort are to be disposed of.

In other words, you argument is that some people -

“Piracy is a way to determine if a game is worth buying or not, same as it would be if I borrowed a physical or digital copy of the game from someone I knew personally who already owned it.”

If the personly you personally knew who already owned it did not give you PERMISSION to “borrow” a copy of the game, then THAT is

“When you pirate, you are sharing a copy of a game already obtained legally.”

You are given their effort under the explicit conditions that you will not copy that effort, let alone give it to others. BY violating that contract, the initial copy of the game is NOT owned legally. So much for THAT claim.

And yes, that

“If no sale is being made, nothing is being stolen”

LOL. If a person’s effort doesn’t sell, then taking that effort and disposing of it in contradiction to their express permission is not stealing their effort! That’s because you are the owner of their effort, NOT them. You can’t steal what YOU already own. They are

“I’m saying that, as a consumer, I am perfectly allowed to complain and not buy games”

Except that’s NOT what you are doing. You are using the complaint to justify theft - of taking the effort of others in contradiction to their consent. It’s like saying you’re allowed to complain if a woman doesn’t want to have sex

“I took a copy of an object bought by someone else.”

Did you acquire the effort of other people with their permission - or without it? Without it. Since the life of others is NOT yours to dispose of as YOU see fit - ie they are NOT your property - you have NO right to it whatsoever EXCEPT with their EXPRESS permission.

W

“It isn’t stealing”

“I am entitled to the money I earn and deciding how to spend it. And part of that transaction is deciding, quite vehemently, to not buy videogames heavily invested in DLC.”

Yes. You are entitled to the money you earn and deciding whether or not to buy something with it. What you are NOT entitled to is the videogame you

“It’s ludicrous on a pure “I can pay 100$ to do an insane amount of things elsewhere that aren’t gaming,” basis”

Of course the idea that one should not take a game if one doesn’t think it worth what the creator seeks for it in trade? Apparently some people view ‘trade’ as just a suggestion. And if you don’t like a price, then its the creator’s fault for the theft! LOL

“plutonium sources are running low”

Being man-made, this shouldn’t be a problem. Of course, neither should water shortages. That’s politics, not science.

“We know now that in the early years of the twenty-first century this world was being watched closely by intelligences greater than man’s and yet as mortal as his own. We know now that as human beings busied themselves about their various concerns they were scrutinized and studied, perhaps almost as narrowly as a man

“The solution to this one is actually pretty simple: Maybe try producing less milk this year. Or, for god’s sake, at the very least quit escalating the supply for a demand that just doesn’t exist.”

Actual journalism would ask questions like: what is leading people to supposedly over produce milk in such large

So AGAIN -Happy Independence Arbitrary Belief Day (because independence, like slavery and ALL other ideas, is just an arbitrary belief) - to the person who has decreed that a woman’s desire not to be raped is JUST her WHIM - NO different than the whim of a rapist.

“what we decide is worth protecting has meaning, though it is arbitrary in the objective sense.”

It has ARBITRARY meaning. Though if you paid attention, you’d note you created a straw man, since the post you are attacking didn’t address, let alone attack the issue of “meaning”. It simply stated YOUR principle declares

Actually, esp in the pilot, I get the vibe that John is interested in a deeper relationship, but that Dutch has held things at arms length (likely because of her assassin past). As such, I would not be at all surprised to see that vibe developed - especially with the addition of a third wheel (John’s brother) to bring

Happy Independence Arbitrary Belief Day - to the person who declares the rapist and his victim the SAME - merely two people with incompatible but equally artificially-constructed beliefs. Neither one right or wrong. Both just proceeding from their completely subjective worldviews.

“There are notices which escalate into fees and so on. ...That force may simply be the inconvenience of being pulled over and cited. It may be fees. Equating all kinds of nudging or laws as lethal force or subjugation is a very large stretch.”

LOL - I only used my gun to steal a LITTLE bit. I didn’t rob fort knox. So