Then again you could always justify it like this: "if its possible, its right to do".

I have an apple and I want to sell it, so I leave it on a table, write a note that says "want an apple? - leave 50 cents!", and leave.

I come back and see that the apple is gone and the note is ripped up.

This makes me think "okay, that was a horrible way to sell my apple", which now promts a response:

- cut my losses and try the same method again
- get better security for my apple
- stop selling apples and find something else to make money off of


Iunno where Im going with this, I guess Im saying "if you can do it, do it".

Take murder, for instance. Not that Im suggesting you go out and kill someone.

Its illlegal, thats fine. The fact that its illegal doesnt render it automatically immoral though. You could easily morally justify murder, however the legal ramifications are still in place. Then it basically boils down to this:

"risk vs reward".

If you find the reward to be worth the risk, there you go.

Speaking about morals in this kind of situation is ridicolous, since morals are fundementally subjective. I can morally justify murdering a schoolbus filled with children in some sort of theoretical excersise, while you might not be able to.

And as morals are changed according to circumstance and context, you cant really find a "global unified moral code" on any matter.


Take software piracy for instance. They slap a "piracy" on there to make it sound horrible, and they tell you that you wouldnt download a car.

Id steal a car under certain circumstances, but thats irrelevant right now.


So you pirate a program.

Who suffers:

- Developers/distributors: less income. easy.
- Users (both pirating and paid): less income to the distributors/developers means less incentive to get strong products out as the cost just doesnt justify hireing better/more people, or buying the rights for a certain SW idea.
- Society: dog eat dog world, companies stuggle for the small marketshare that still pays for product, but in a cutthroat manner that needs to cut costs by any means and target specifically for users either too inept or too morally righteous to exploit the technology.


Who wins:

- Developers: Producers realize that the cash can not come from SW sales directly, and find alternate measures; advertising is one of the recent ones. Think stuff like product placement in games, what have you. This is progress in a market thats set to die soon. Alternatively, or also, they find security measures that actually fend off piracy. Another alternative is to be able to lay down a global law against it and effectively shut down piracy somehow.
- Users: Desperation breeds innovation, which could ultimately be to the users advantage.
- Society: we face a threat, and by living through it, we learn, adapt and continue. Its not a huge threat, its a minor shift in how SW development and distribution works. Bottom line could easily be on the plusside for us as a whole.




PS:
Wow I should really not write stuff. Ever. Ah well.