How about even Genocide?

Nope, sorry, mate....we're busy making sure every human being has a right to access pornography as and when he deems fit.

Dang it, man....it's all about priorities.....

Most folks need to keep busy so that's why there are organizations like the UN, otherwise they will just run amuck.  Unfortunately if we don't pay attention they run amuck anyway. 

Already declared mate.

Article 3.

• Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 25.

• (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
• (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

This is rather OT, isn't it? ISP's being pressured to act as police was the OT.

Piracy (bootlegging) is the norm in the Philippines, where the vast majority of people are playing burned copies of games, watching bootleg movies, etc, etc. With an average salary of $300, it's not really feasible for people to pay for a AAA titles. Claiming piracy isn't caused by economic inequality is, at best, wrong.

I'm not saying greed doesn't cause its own share of piracy. (Or laziness, either.) But we have some very clear real-world examples that suggest greed isn't the sole push behind piracy, and suggesting it is doesn't help the argument.

louist - People all over the world have different incomes and standards of living. People desire things, even things they can't afford.

That doesn't make them bad people... at least not to me. Perhaps differential pricing should be considered. Not my place to say.

However, using the excuse "I couldn't buy it, therefore I use Pirated software" just doesn't cut it.

The desire to own what you can't afford isn't evil. Stealing it and profiting by its theft is a criminal act, and it's motivated by greed for money.

You aren't talking about food, water, shelter or medical care. You're talking about movies and games. C'mon.

You continue to miss the point: you're granting uneccessary power. There is no study showing piracy will destroy the market. None. The only thing this does is allow ISPs to arbitrarily determine what content is protected (again, I'd like to wonder about my Pogoplug) and allow for already abusive corporations to enforce their copyrights incorrectly by evading the courts.

Your illegal drug argument doen't fly. Nor do I really understand its purpose in this discussion. The War Against Drugs could be solved in nearly one night by just legalizing drugs (but again, this is a discussion on another subject altogether).

By brick and mortar do you mean walling up the internet and tracking who goes in, what they do? I... don't know what to say to such an idea, other than its completely, utterly ridiculous.

illmunkeys:

1. "Brick and mortar" stores: the kind you walk into physically and buy something and walk out with it. A physical establishment as opposed to an online 'virtual' one. Got it now?

2. You persist in thinking I don't understand you. I do. You and I are simply diametrically opposed on some issues. But that's ok, as long as it's done respectfully. What I personally believe is in #85. 

Oh really? France instituted the 3 strike rule. Then you're disconnected from the net.

France’s Three-Strikes Law for Internet Piracy Hasn’t Brought Any Penalties

"Meanwhile, piracy persists. According to at least one study, by the University of Rennes, unauthorized sharing of content on the Internet has actually increased in France since the legislation was passed."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/19/technology/internet/19iht-CACHE.html

France Suspends Internet Piracy Monitoring after Hack Leaks Private ISP Data  

I don't know if you follow Techdirt. You really should. The man writes really, really well on legal tech issues, including this one (in fact, this is a huge conversation point for him).

True, I'm not talking about water, shelter, or medicine. But the bare minimum required to actually exist falls well short of what we consider to be minimum standard of living--the definition of which continues to change and expand, as exemplified in the growing trend towards guaranteed internet access. It's certainly not insane to imagine it might one day include such apparent trivialities as affordable entertainment.

As our world becomes increasingly digital, we're seeing the way we value digital media change. symptom of this is obviously piracy. And while piracy, no matter what the root cause, is illegal, it is also socially acceptable. A huge portion of society engages in the act, and even more are involved as third parties. We can see the... lack of social taboo most clearly in poorer communities, where the lack of realistic alternative makes piracy, rather than retail, the social norm. But that lack of taboo exists at everywhere and at every tax bracket. It's grandmothers, grandchildren, sons, daughters, mothers, fathers, sisters, and brothers. It's evident in every station, vocation, and nation. (A bit over the top, but still true--and damn it, I enjoyed it!)

It's clearly a law that a large and growing number of everyday people no longer subscribe to. That does indeed make them criminals, but it doesn't necessarily make them inherently wrong.

I'm going to backtrack a little and come at this from another angle, and, because I can't quite seem to type something that I'm happy with, I'm going to copy and paste something I wrote on these forums a year ago. It doesn't fit into this discussion perfectly, but it's close enough. Slightly edited.

Tells me the criminals were feeling the pinch and decided to increase blackhat attacks - a form or blackmail (for the other ISP's): "To encourage the others".

As for the French Universities, it seems to have had the opposite effect here, possibly because the Universties are policing themselves. That goes back to the point of responsible conduct... if people can't behave, then they require supervision - as disgusting as that is.

Thanks for the tip, illmunkeys. I'll be glad to take a look.

I think that applying our standards to others and/or causing them to take ours is in violation of the Prime Directive. Humor aside, I think it's dreadful that they receive so little for hard work. It causes populations to defect, causes poor health and living conditions and misery. And our economy drives it. Sickens me, actually. But that's beside the point.

Whether they agree with the law or disagree, it is the law, and disrespecting it won't improve their conditions. "I'm poor, so I can do what I wish to live 'the good life'". is an argument which does not sway me, as it is illogical. Human, but illogical and irrational.

As for laws evolving and changing - that's a given. The definitions of theft still put electronic theft (and that's what it is) beyond the pale. That's as it should be.

No amount of argument will ever convince me that it's ok to take what belongs to someone else without paying for it to the owner (not the thief), and passing it on freely or charging for it.

Down deep, no matter how rationalized, theft is theft, and it hurts the victim and the thief as well as the economies involved. I suppose that makes me a fossil in many eyes. So be it.