|
|
|
|
|
by jMyles
772 days ago
|
|
At some level, isn't the whole exercise of characterizing the copying of bytes as "piracy" just a way to justify invasive state policy? We can observe that the nature of information is that it is free to copy. This is not a new observation; the myth of Prometheus tells us of this nature, and of the power that the gods foolishly attempt to shore up by pretending that it can't be copied. Of course I agree that solid games are worth money, but if you have to avert your eyes to the entire evolution of the way information propagates in the universe in order to achieve that, you've gone down an incorrect path. And yes, building entire media empires designed to leverage your right to distribute bytes as you see fit, while prohibiting others from distributing them under threat of violence, is most certainly rent-seeking. The silly fiction that someone "owns" that information because of a previous historical event is not in keeping with any part of nature that I'm able to observe. What makes anyone think that on sufficiently long time scales the internet will continue to abide this? |
|
I'm done.