Why do you put the word victim in scare quotes. If somebody is having their rights willfully and purposefully violated by another person, then they are a victim. You can try and spin it all you want, but it really is that black and white. Techdirt tries to gloss over this simple fact, but the fact remains. Don’t get mad at me for pointing out the obvious.

Stop blaming the victims, and start blaming the only side that is to blame for piracy–the pirates. I’ll win the moral every single time. That’s why you guys don’t want to have it. When you take works that are for sale without paying for them, you are hurting the victims and you are violating their rights. Just admit that much and start from there.

Are there other business models out there? Sure. If your alternative models are so great, more people would be using them. Maybe one day everyone will. But until then, stop pretending like people following the business model where they sell the product that other people value (crazy!) are actually doing anything wrong. They aren’t. The only ones doing anything wrong are the ones that violate other people’s rights. It’s really that simple.

Thing is, for morals to even be valid they must be respectable values. “ip” has failed this fundamental test.

It fails that test yet practically every nation on earth recognizes it and grants rights for it. You’re living in a dream world that doesn’t exist. You may not respect IP, but that’s clearly not the majority view. And let me guess, you have no problem with deciding for themselves which rights are important and which are not. Am I right? Can I decide which of your rights are important and which ones I want to violate? This stuff isn’t hard. If you read Techdirt too much you’ll be spoonfed all sorts of apologist propaganda, but at the end of the day it comes down to whether you decide for yourself to violate the law and the violate other people’s rights. Sadly, many of Mike’s devout followers have no problem with deciding to violate other people’s rights. Mike gives you guys all sorts of excuses to hang your hats on. That’s his fundamental purpose in life, as far as I can tell.

Very kind of you to tip your head to their legitimacy for once — and yet, you refuse to actually talk about them. Instead, you hijack every post into an argument about the morals of piracy. You may notice that this is exactly my point here, and it’s exactly what makes you a troll.

If you have a business model that works for some people. Great. Good for you and good for them. It’s the expecting that everyone else should use your alternative models where the problem begins. Prove to the world that your way is better. Nothing is stopping you from doing this. Copyright doesn’t prohibit artists from giving their works away if they want to. If your way is better, others will follow. But until you get the world on your side, don’t be so angry at the world for choosing a different path. And don’t be angry at artists who choose to exercise their marketable right. And please stop pretending like the marketable right that copyright provides doesn’t bring lots of great works into the world. It clearly does. Even most of the books that Techdirt uses in its book club are the product of the copyright business model. You guys can’t even find more than a couple books published under your alternative models. That should tell you something about your models.

You really think being a victim is black and white? There are a lot of things to be a victim of, and I’d certainly choose some over others.

If a pirate chooses to violate someone’s rights, then that someone is a victim. And only the pirate is to blame. Everything taught on Techdirt to the contrary is pirate-apologism. It’s really that simple. I couldn’t care less if you want to show people a route that you think is better. It’s when you are so condescending and closed-minded to anyone that doesn’t take your alternate route that the apologism kicks in. Techdirt is all about pirate-apologism. Day after day, post after post, copyright is torn to pieces and the virtues of piracy are defended and extolled. Rightholders who dare exercise their rights are mocked and belittled. Don’t pretend even for one second that that’s not the case. You can try and pretend like morality doesn’t play into it, but the fact remains that Techdirt has taken the side of the pirates, and the pirates are amorally violating other people’s rights. Considering the fact that you’ve chosen the amoral side of the argument, the fact that you don’t want to talk about the morals isn’t at all surprising.

Thing is “rights” are entirely abitrary.

Funny thing is, some of the rights that we value the most are arbitrary. I’m thinking of the implied fundamental liberty rights that the Supreme Court has identified in its line of substantive due process cases. These are fundamental rights like the right to marry and the right to privacy. Talk about arbitrary. One word in the Constitution, “liberty,” has been interpreted to imply a host of fundamental rights.

But copyright is anything but arbitrary. It’s mentioned in the Constitution directly, and then Congress has spelled it out explicitly in the Copyright Act. It’s anything but arbitrary.

Can you answer a couple questions?

1. Do you agree that if someone violates your rights, then that someone has acted immorally? If not, then which of your rights is it moral to violate?

2. Do you agree that Techdirt is about A LOT more than just helping artists out in the digital age? Do you agree that Techdirt has thrust itself into the copyright wars?

If you’re asking me (I can’t conveniently view this in threaded view any longer), then I don’t know. Telling people what business model to use is not what I do. Nor do I care to. I’m interested in the law and theory of copyright. I leave the business stuff to the folks who do business stuff.

Yes, it gives congress the power to enact such laws, yes. You try to use that to claim that the specific laws are automatically correct. That’s a false conclusion, and you know it. You’re the one grasping.

I’m saying it’s correct because it in fact is the law and in fact people have copyright laws and in fact copyright rights are violated when someone pirates. If a pirate violates someone’s rights, that is per se wrong. My moral compass is quite simple. I learned this stuff when I was like 4.

So you are proud of having the simplistic, underdeveloped morality of a 4-year-old? That explains a lot.

My point, which went over your head, is that I learned that violating people’s personal rights was wrong when I was four. Good job ignoring everything else I stated so you could get your childish dig in.