Of course harm matters. Stealing a priceless original is worse, and punished harder, than stealing a commodity out of a corner store. That doesn’t mean the latter is fine.
Property, a social construct, is always imaginary. The ship on IP, from insider trading laws to copyright, has sailed. If the only argument against a potential crime is IP isn’t real, the person is probably wrong.
Impact and harm is absolutely part of the criteria by which we judge crimes and penalties. Not sure where you're going with that.
Of course harm matters. Stealing a priceless original is worse, and punished harder, than stealing a commodity out of a corner store. That doesn’t mean the latter is fine.
There's a spectrum between "not fine" and criminal prosecution!
1 reply →
You can infinitely "steal" digital data. That's where the analogy breaks down.
Imaginary property is imaginary.
> Imaginary property is imaginary
Property, a social construct, is always imaginary. The ship on IP, from insider trading laws to copyright, has sailed. If the only argument against a potential crime is IP isn’t real, the person is probably wrong.
This is all very well but exactly what type of IP is CCTV footage? It's not copyrighted. It's not patented. It's not trademarked. ...trade secret?
2 replies →
Stealing physical property deprives its original owner of it. The same can't be said of IP.
1 reply →