commie comments on Pluralistic: “If buying isn’t owning, piracy isn’t stealing”

Technology

43,563 readers

2,025 active

322 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 4 years ago

moderators

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 2 years ago (3 children)

your might owe under almost any circumstance, but almost all of them have to drop with a mutually agreed contract or transfer of property. what circumstance do you think created the debt here? and what if someone walks across my front yard bridge? do they owe the engineers too? it's just silly.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

This is going into feasability and away from morality, but ok.

The law is the "mutually agreed contract", and the usage created the dept. You can be expected to know that the design of a bridge might be copyrighted, you can't be expected to know that a bridge is private property and crossing it requires a fee. Ergo it's on you to contact the owner of the design, and it's on you to collect a fee from people using your bridge if that is what you want to do.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments