Posts: 13,422
Threads: 604
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
MacArtist wrote:
So now theft is the worst moral infraction?
There are 7 of them. Greed is one of them, theft ties into that in this case. I'm not saying that there aren't worse things to do. Just that this seems far to prevalent in our society and everyone is complacent and tolerant of it. .
Posts: 13,422
Threads: 604
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
Psurfer wrote:
If the buyer pays for the software, then you're unjustly accusing, which I understand is also some sort of sin.
Nope, you already broke the agreement when you installed it on more than one computer. Why are you defending him MacArtist when he quite obviously has done something wrong? Maybe we need a public poll to see where everyone stands on this issue.
Posts: 23,742
Threads: 1,348
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
Posts: 6,923
Threads: 399
Joined: Apr 2025
Reputation:
0
Because the person calling him out is as guilty as he is. As we all are.
It's called hypocrisy.
Throw the first stone.
Posts: 13,422
Threads: 604
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
MacArtist wrote:
Because the person calling him out is as guilty as he is. As we all are.
It's called hypocrisy.
Throw the first stone.
So as long as everyone else is doing it, it is ok? I'll remember that one.
Posts: 6,923
Threads: 399
Joined: Apr 2025
Reputation:
0
I'm sure in certain situations; you already memorized that one.
Posts: 13,422
Threads: 604
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
Posts: 2,348
Threads: 235
Joined: May 2015
Installing unlicensed copy of OS = theft. (criminal)
Installing a licensed copy of OS not as intended by licensor = breach of contract. (civil)
The former is considered immoral by the law and by most people. The latter is not immoral in the eyes of the law; however, some people may view breach of contract as immoral.
Ripping a CD that you own may be a breach of contract (read the terms of the license agreement), but it certainly isn't criminal. But if you sell or otherwise transfer the license of that CD and continue to listen to the music you ripped, that is illegal.
The fact that "everyone does it" does not make something less immoral, illegal or breachy. Back to my torrents!
Posts: 17,292
Threads: 1,510
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
1
so, I'm reading this thread and thinking, "if the buyer wants Leopard, and the seller is willing to prep the iMac for sale; why doesn't the buyer go out and buy Leopard for whatever deal they want, and provide said copy of Leopard to the seller to prep the the machine?"
if the seller is nice enough to offer to prep the machine w/ something other than the original restore DVD, then the buyer should provide whatever that is. to do anything else is bending or breaking rules somewhere, or taking advantage of someone/something for some sort of personal gain. in an economic transaction, personal gain, by definition, comes at the expense of others, so it boils down to whether or not that expense is at the will of, or w/ the knowledge of the others that said expense comes from. all one has to do, is think about what they're doing to know if their transaction is legitimate. caring about what they're doing is clearly a different story.
Posts: 52,243
Threads: 2,802
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
2
You don't kill, you don't steal candy from the mouths of babies and you don't pirate ships on the high seas so yes you do have morals.
This assumes facts not in evidence.
why doesn't the buyer go out and buy Leopard for whatever deal they want, and provide said copy of Leopard to the seller to prep the the machine?
Possibly because the buyer can set whatever terms he or she likes regarding the deal they want to make. As can the seller.
The buyer has made getting Leopard on the machine as part of the deal. His right, his decision.
The seller has agreed to this (his right, his decision) and should include the legal Install disk used for the Installation. The buyer could take the Mac with no OS installed, but any OS on it should be accompanied by the legal disk. Moral? Judgement call, but I'd say so. Legal? Absolutely. Ethical? At the very least. To not include it would be a violation of at least two of the three aforementioned tenants.
if the seller is nice enough to offer to prep the machine...
Again, that's an assumption.
The statement "The buyer wants Leopard on it." and subsequent statements lead me to believe that this is more about making a sale than being nice.
...w/ something other than the original restore DVD, then the buyer should provide whatever that is.
BS. There is no "should". The buyer could make a request such as "if I give you a Leopard disk, would you install it for me?".
Then there is bargaining.
Buyer: "I want Leopard on that Mac."
Seller: "It'll cost you more because it's not the OS on the OEM install disks."
Buyer: "No, it won't. Same price. No Leopard, no deal."
Seller: "Pound salt. Step off. You want a non factory OS, you bring me a Retail disk or pay the price."
Or:
Seller: "You want Leopard, you got Leopard." But the disk will cost you extra, you bastard.
Buyer: "Great. We have a deal!"
It would seem neither party is concerned about the EULA.
The "nice" part is setting any version of X to give the Bienvenidos Experience.
It's OK to steal or in this case violate the EULA. If everybody does it, how can it be wrong? As long as it's just a little bit. And the violator gets to set the bar, gets to define the limits of "just a little". It shouldn't be anymore then he or she is comfortable with. That would be-- just wrong.
Somebody somewhere has done it; many people have done it; therefore everybody has done it. Not only is this another assumption (and brutally flawed logic), it's deflection. And rationalization.
to do anything else is bending or breaking rules somewhere, or taking advantage of someone/something for some sort of personal gain.
And again, the seller is OK with that.
in an economic transaction, personal gain, by definition, comes at the expense of others
Um, where exactly do you find personal gain defined as being at the expense of others?
...so it boils down to whether or not that expense is at the will of, or w/ the knowledge of the others that said expense comes from. all one has to do, is think about what they're doing to know if their transaction is legitimate.
So, in this case it boils down to the seller explaining that there will be no legal Leopard disk included in the transaction unless the buyer is willing to pay more. On that we agree.
caring about what they're doing is clearly a different story.
At this juncture it appears they don't. If that's the case, then what we have here is more than bargaining. It's conspiracy.
(Just thought I'd throw that in, no extra charge.)
|