NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/comp/sys/amiga/misc/17246

Text File | 1992-11-21 | 7.2 KB | 134 lines

Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Path: sparky!uunet!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!nntp.msstate.edu!tacky.cs.olemiss.edu!skip
From: [e-mail] (Skip Sauls)
Subject: Re: Piracy and Skip Sauls
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: tacky.cs.olemiss.edu
Organization: University of Mississippi, Dept. of Computer Science
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 19:14:35 GMT
Lines: 121

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rockerboy) writes:
>This is an open letter to Mr. Sauls, who is obviously so rabid that he
>cannot participate in rational discourse.  It is your kind of behavior
>that destroys any credibility that anti-piracy-advocates have.  You make
>assumptions without any evidence; you name call; you insult; and you
>provide no logical reason for your ravings.  Essentially, you are a pig,
>and I would imagine that almost anyone who sides with you cringes when
>they see your posts.  Your responses to me on this newsgroup were highly
>insulting, wildly innaccurate, and completely baseless.  I shall address
>them one by one.

I am an individual and only speak for myself, not your anti-piracy-advocates
nor any other group.  As for making assumptions, I admit that when I read a
posting in which someone tries to defend a crime I tend to hold them in very
low regard.  If you want to call me a pig, feel free to do so, but do realize
what a hypocrite it makes you.  And I never claimed to be a Vulcan or a
computer, thus my arguments have a high probability of being illogical.

>1.  I am not a pirate.  I have given you no evidence to believe that I am
>so, and I therefore question your capability to draw this conclusion.

If you are not a pirate, great!  But your defense of piracy against the
non-piracy-advocates (your term, not mine) leads me to wonder about your
character.  I do not like lawyers who defend criminals who are without a
doubt guilty either.

>Your skills of deduction need serious work, sir.

Probably, I've never claimed to be a detective or lawyer.

>2.  I do not condone piracy per se.  I would have to be a fool to demand
>software should be free, since I intend to make my living producing it
>someday.  I _do_ feel that the present day laws are not properly defined.
> Copyright law was not written to encompass easily reproduceable data, as
>the capability was not available when the concept was established.  I do
>not feel that the current laws properly reflect reality, and I feel they
>need to be reworked.

Copyright law is hardly the only law to be affected by change.  If one
wishes to change the laws, there is a system by which such a thing is done.
One way is to petition the government, but in this country you need to have
quite a bit of influence and/or money to do so.  Another way is a bit more
drastic and requires that someone be willing to go before the courts and
challenge the laws.  Again, this requires resources that few people are
willing or able to provide.  Perhaps if all the advocates of the free
distribution of software were to band together they might be able to mount
such an effort, but I sincerely doubt it.  If several of the pirates were
to turn themselves in and be willing to stand trial...

>                      That belief, sir, does not make me a pirate, nor
>does it make me deserving of the vitriol you have spewed in my direction
>for my having had the temerity to gainsay the almighty net.moralists.

Ouch!  Your last sentence looks as if it had been written by a scumbag,
whoops, I mean a lawyer.  Seriously though, your siding with the pirates is
the reason for my anger and assumptions.  As for "net.moralists", I doubt
that you'd classify me in that group if you've read any of my somewhat
infamous posts on c.s.a.advocacy.

>3.  I am not fifteen years old.  I am, in fact, quite a bit older.  I use
>this handle, as I grow tired of explaining to fools such as yourself,
>because I _like_ it.  I could just as easily ask you why you use your
>real name.  The fact is, one is much more likely to remember the name
>'Rockerboy' that my real name, 'Matthew Gilbert'.  'Matthew Gilbert' is
>the name my parents gave me, and has nothing to do with my own
>individualism.  'Rockerboy' is more descriptive, and conveys a better
>image to those who understand its significance.  (I don't expect the
>brain dead like yourself to understand.)

I do not have a problem with the use of a nickname by you or anyone else,
as long as you are willing to admit your true identity when defending a
criminal action.  If someone is afraid to reveal their true identity, I have
no choice but to be suspicious of them.

I won't tell you what image 'Rockerboy' conveys to me as I don't want to
upset you anymore than you so obviously are now.  Funny how you object to
being called names, yet you so easily resort to that tactic yourself.

>4.  I would like to know how it is that your position became the one and
>only position one might take?  I posted a logical, well thought out
>message, and I have been flooded with trash from mindless zombies like
>you.  In fact, there is a letter in my mailbox _right_ now which says
>simply, 'Hey!  Dickhead!  Piracy _is_ theft!'  Oh, that speaks volumes
>about the level of intellect of its poster, eh?

Maybe you'll spend a bit more time thinking your message out before posting
again.  There are quite a few people on the net who are in computer related
fields and most realize how seriously piracy can and does affect their lives.
As for your being logical, I'm certain that there are criminals who can
justify their actions using their own brand of logic also.

>You have incredible gaul to accuse me of being childish, sir.  I, at
>least, consider points made, and rationally form an opinion.  I do not
>wantonly attack people with whom I disagree.  I don't think ypou can say
>either.  You have attacked anyone here who has dared speak a contrary
>thought to your holy beliefs.  Get a clue yourself.  You are a blatant
>idiot if you think that your rediculous comparison's in reply to my
>original posting would sway anyone but people equally as foolish as
>yourself.  I do not claim to be infallible, but if you want totell me I'm
>wrong, do me the courtesy of providing rational argument, instead of
>jumping up and down, screaming 'I'm right!  I'm right!  I'm right!  And
>you're a dirty pirate!  Everybody knows fifteen year old dirty pirate
>scum can't be right!'

You're right, I do not agree with what pirates and defenders of piracy are
saying and have spoken out against them.  I am also a human being and will
not delude myself into thinking that everything that I say is completely
rational.  If you'll re-read your post, I think that you'll see that you
are as guilty as anyone for acting a bit irrationally.  You have had your
chain yanked and are acting just like anybody else.

>And to those who will likely question my waste of bandwidth by posting
>this message publicly, I would like to point out that this fellow has
>libeled me in public, and I felt it only fair that I respond to such hate
>publicly.  I apologise if anyone is bothered by this.

Hate?  No, I feel no hatred, just pity.

Skip Sauls, Amiga Advocate
[e-mail]