[pigscantfly]

Practicing civil disobedience against laws you believe unethical is not morally dubious, it's legally dubious. If anything, I'd consider it a display of moral fortitude to prize one's ethics above the potential consequences.

[bee_rider]

I actually think piracy is more like speeding than civil disobedience for most people. The intent of most people who pirate things isn't to get caught and change the laws. The intent is to just ignore a law that is inconvenient.

And it is sort of similar in the sense that, copyright law is over aggressive, honestly, many speed limits are set too low, violation is pretty wide-spread, and within reason it seems basically fine.

It breaks down a bit at the edges though, because extreme violations of speed limits can result in harm and death, while copyright is just lost profits.

[nrb]

> It breaks down a bit at the edges though, because extreme violations of speed limits can result in harm and death, while copyright is just lost profits.

It’s not remotely the same amount of harm, but mass violations of copyright seem to be able to end series and potentially production companies. Netflix and Hulu appear to be making go/no-go decisions about a series after the first few days/weeks of viewership data.

[mhb]

There's a difference between civil disobedience and just getting away with something because you can.

[Blammar]

Exactly. And now it's time for Godwin, more or less: would you have followed the laws in Nazi Germany that made Jews less than human?

[bee_rider]

I mean I think copyright laws are dumb but this seems a like a bit of an over-dramatic comparison.

[nkjnlknlk]

Not really when the initial comment was that it is immoral to disobey _any_ law.

[alvarezbjm-hn]

Here in HN it is frowned upon, but I do sometimes like to exagerate a point to show perspective, first.

Now that we can agree that law can not be followed 100% of time let's kill the comparison with genocide.