Found The Revolution: A Manifesto in audiobook format on BitTorrent

[FrankRep]

Frankly, I'm surprised you take this tack.

It sounds remarkably similar to Karl Marx's belief that....

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

In the special case of trying to wake up the country to Ron Paul and trying to stop an economic collapse, I consider getting the information out to the public a top priority.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Matt,

You're advocating taking what does not belong to you. I would think your Mother taught you that concept, well before 5 years of age.

Again, you can pretty it up all you want, but you are advocating the theft of someone else's work.

 

[MsDoodahs]

Slap all the lipstick on that pig you want to, guys.

It is still a pig.

 

[LibertyEagle]

In the special case of trying to wake up the country to Ron Paul and trying to stop an economic collapse, I consider getting the information out to the public a top priority.

So, because it's really really important, it's ok to steal? Is that your premise?

You have the option of buying books yourself and giving them away, or writing to Ron and asking his permission to make copies and distribute.

I agree that it's important to get it out there, but should we give up our basic principles in the process?

 

[FrankRep]

Couldn't "illegal downloading" of a book be compared to letting someone borrow a book off your shelf?

 

[Matt Collins]

An author has a reasonable expectation of recompense and your way, it isn't forthcoming.

Actually the law disagrees with you.

 

[Matt Collins]

You're advocating taking what does not belong to you.

I don't think I am actually. But either way, it still isn't theft.

I would think your Mother taught you that concept, well before 5 years of age.

Again, you can pretty it up all you want, but you are advocating the theft of someone else's work.

It's not theft, and attempting to simplify a highly complex issue such as copyright law is not very wise because it shows everyone how much you don't really know about the subject.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Couldn't "illegal downloading" of a book be compared to letting someone borrow a book off your shelf?

Well Frank, I think you're trying to rationalize it. But, that's just my opinion. You have to make that decision for yourself.

 

[Matt Collins]

Couldn't "illegal downloading" of a book be compared to letting someone borrow a book off your shelf?

Actually downloading it isn't unlawful, offering it to upload is the unlawful part. One of the rights granted to authors is the right to distribute, among the right to copy, the right of public performance, the right of attribution, etc... Uploading a copyrighted work is the infringing part because the uploader doesn't have the right to distribute.


And if you look at any of the *.AA cases, no one has ever been sued for downloading. They have all been sued for uploading.

 

[MsDoodahs]

Which guides your behavior?

The law ... or your morals?

 

[LibertyEagle]

Matt,

It's very simple.

You don't own the content of Ron's book.

Therefore, if you copy said content and distribute it, without the permission of the author, or purchase of said content, you are stealing.

If you do not have the money to buy copies of Ron's content and distribute, then you have the option of requesting his permission to copy and distribute it for free.

It's not really rocket science.

 

[RonPaulVolunteer]

Which guides your behavior?

The law ... or your morals?

What guided the founding fathers in 1776?

If they did not choose to break the law of the land, YOU would not be here to have this discussion today!

 

[Kludge]

Couldn't "illegal downloading" of a book be compared to letting someone borrow a book off your shelf?

More like replicating the book and then distributing it - and then, why shouldn't a store be allowed to sell the replicas?

 

[RonPaulVolunteer]

Matt,

It's very simple.

You don't own the content of Ron's book.

Therefore, if you copy said content and distribute it, without the permission of the author, or purchase of said content, you are stealing.

If you do not have the money to buy copies of Ron's content and distribute, then you have the option of requesting his permission to copy and distribute it for free.

It's not really rocket science.

What's not rocket science LE (and others), is the simple fact that you hold Ron Paul making a buck of more importance than this nation being woken up.

And that, speaks volumes.

Pun intended.

 

[SnappleLlama]

Why is making money such a bad thing? There are always libraries, folks, if you don't want to buy the damn book.

 

[MsDoodahs]

What's not rocket science LE (and others), is the simple fact that you hold Ron Paul making a buck of more importance than this nation being woken up.

And that, speaks volumes.

Pun intended.

That's not true.

I want the nation to be awakened. But I'm not willing to compromise my stance against what I see as theft in order to accomplish that goal, as I don't believe it is necessary.

Others are making a different choice, and that's fine.

 

[Matt Collins]

Which guides your behavior?

The law ... or your morals?

As I have said, it is not unlawful to download the material, only upload it. And this is not a moral issue in any way because it's strictly a construct of law.

Think of law and morality as two separate and distinct lines. Sometimes they intersect, sometimes they don't. This is an instance where they don't.

 

[LibertyEagle]

What's not rocket science LE (and others), is the simple fact that you hold Ron Paul making a buck of more importance than this nation being woken up.

And that, speaks volumes.

Pun intended.

Well, you know, it doesn't speak well of our understanding of Liberty, if we justify stealing someone else's work in the process.

Or, are you advocating Machiavelli's belief that the end justifies the means? That is also a tenet of the Neocons, by the way. You may want to review Ron's speech, "Neo-conned".

Note: I find it curious that you seem to condemn another person "making a buck". Are you against free market capitalism?

 

[Matt Collins]

You don't own the content of Ron's book.

Therefore, if you copy said content and distribute it, without the permission of the author, or purchase of said content, you are stealing.

Again this is incorrect.


From Merriam-Websters:
THEFT: "the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it"

Since a copy is being made, the original owner is deprived of nothing. Therefore this does not fall under the definition of theft in reality, or in law.

It's not really rocket science.

If it's so simple, then why do you keep getting it wrong?

And yes copyright law is complex.... absurdly complex.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Matt,

You're playing word games.