I'm sorry, but am I the only one wondering about the ... tone of dhh's response? I mean, "fucking scumbags", is he like 14? He has every right to be upset, but the choice of words are in no way helpful. just saying..
What would you call that person? I call those people scumbags.
That, more than anything, pisses me off about this. That somehow the RIAA is wrong when it calls people infringing it's copyright thieves, but when it's one of our own getting hurt, we hang the culprits out to dry.
Call them scumbags. Get all indignant and tweet about it to your followers and whine to the 'interwebz.' But at least have the courtesy to be truthful and accurate. Otherwise, your just a scummy.
Or maybe I just choose to ignore your pathetic misdirection and call things as I see them, which couldn't be more obvious to the eye. Because that's what a retraction of the work and the (forced) composition of a public apology are all about.
I'm sorry. Maybe you could point to me where 37Signals no longer has what was stolen?
I also applaud your open commitment in support of redefining copyright infringement as thievery. Let me know how that works out for you.
Finally, you should avoid baseless insults. It makes you appear stupid and detracts from what you are attempting to say. Throwing around insults like you do hurts the quality of HN. Maybe that's what you want, but I'd prefer to keep things accurate and intelligent.
Case closed. No need for lawyering, they know what they did and they know it's wrong.
> No need for lawyering.
No, there is every need to be accurate. Maybe you aren't aware of how long the fight has been going on, but the use of the term pirate and stealing isn't a new thing. Allowing it's use frames the argument in a light that isn't accurate.
Words have power.
Don't agree with me? A criminal like you would.
You say that. It's fairly rude. You can disagree with me, but trying to belittle my argument with insults is rude. I don't think my original comment went over the line at any point to warrant such a reaction. Be honest, your comment from the first word, was fairly facetious.
Disagree with me, but do so on the merits of intelligence, not insults.
I'm in full agreement that copyright infringement is not theft.
However, I think this part of the argument is weaker. Things can have value through scarcity, and even more so through uniqueness. To copy something, in such cases, can lead to a reduction in value of the original. If what you had was "the only <whatever> in the world" someone copying it takes that away from you without ever taking the item away.
Whether that's true in this specific case, is a somewhat different argument, of course.