It may appear apparent that exactly what they will do is incorrect. After all, it is illegal. But there are many things that have been unlawful that people do not believe are morally incorrect. Same-sex relationships, divorce and lots of other practices that are now extensively accepted as ethically appropriate were once forbidden and criminally sanctioned.
Couple of individuals believe they were wrong simply before they were legalised. Rather, they tend to believe the laws governing these behaviours were unjust. So appeal just to the illegality of downloading does not settle whether it is okay, ethically speaking.
Two competing camps dominate public discussion around the ethics of unlawful downloading. On the one hand, there are exactly what may be called fundamentalist libertarians. These think that all concepts and artistic production need to be held in typical and be easily accessible to all.
In their view, intellectual property, in the formthrough copyright and patents, unjustly restricts access to ideas and expression. They consider prohibited downloading to be victimless crime, and do not think it imposes considerable cost on anybody. In their view, the major criminal sanctions that sometimes connect to prohibited downloading are severe and unjustified.
On the other hand, there are what might be called the fundamentalist protectors. This camp thinks that prohibited downloading is comparable to common theft.
This view is clearly revealed in the aggressive message that often precedes movies in Australia:
You wouldnt steal a car, you wouldnt steal a bag, you wouldnt take a tv, you wouldnt take a film. Downloading pirated movies is taking.… read more