Son of a bitch!

[d000hg]

What about ripping music you already have? For iphone/ipod? Is that actually legal?

There you go... it's legal (apparently) to download pirated films but seems clearly to be wrong to do so. But it's illegal to crack DRM on your own copies so they'll play on your various devices, but seems clearly to be quite moral.

[TheFaQQer]

So if instead of selling pedo porn, the newsagent gives out leaflets with URLs to pedo porn sites, that's OK? He's not holding or distributing the porn, after all.

Why would they do that - I'm sure you'd be able to find it via Google if you tried hard enough.

I don't know whether it is legal to distribute the leaflets or not. However, having a webpage which contains links is not illegal in this country, so state censorship to block them is wrong.

If someone runs in front of my car and is killed, I haven't done anything illegal.

Possibly, possibly not. It depends on how you were driving, whether you were driving legally etc.

There's a massive difference between Google finding links to illegal material due to automated tools working that way, and an organisation whose very existance is based around helping people pirate files (the clue's in the name PIRATE bay).

There is a difference in the way that links are created. There is no difference in the fact that there are links on there.

[TheFaQQer]

What about ripping music you already have? For iphone/ipod? Is that actually legal?

Not at the moment, but the law is changing to reflect reality.

Linky - warning it's one of those annoying pages which starts playing a video when it opens. And it's a video of Vince Cable.

[d000hg]

However, having a webpage which contains links is not illegal in this country, so state censorship to block them is wrong.

Balls it isn't. Set up a page with links to pedo porn sites and see if that's illegal. Promoting or inciting illegal activity is often illegal.

Possibly, possibly not. It depends on how you were driving, whether you were driving legally etc.

You're deflecting. Intent is the key issue here. Of course in my example you could still be convicted of a lesser crime in manslaughter but that's the analogy breaking down... anyway the point is intent to kill and accidentally killing are totally different.

There is a difference in the way that links are created. There is no difference in the fact that there are links on there.

Which is irrelevant. How they got there and why is kind of important. Planning to murder someone is a crime even if you don't succeed (look up Joss Stone in the news), but killing someone by sheer accident likely is not a crime at all. Intent is as important as end result, if not more so.

[SimonMac]

What the law says, and what is right, are not always the same. It's not illegal for me to bone your wife as long as she wants it, but it is for me to drive 80mph on a motorway.

The fight for a change in the law!

The problem is technology always moves faster than legislation, so people get used to doing something which was legal, but is then not people will ignore the new law

[TheFaQQer]

Balls it isn't. Set up a page with links to pedo porn sites and see if that's illegal. Promoting or inciting illegal activity is often illegal.

You don't need to. You just need to use a search engine like Google, if that's what you are after.

So, should Google be banned?

You're deflecting. Intent is the key issue here. Of course in my example you could still be convicted of a lesser crime in manslaughter but that's the analogy breaking down... anyway the point is intent to kill and accidentally killing are totally different.

One is murder, the other is manslaughter. However, both are against the law.

Which is irrelevant. How they got there and why is kind of important. Planning to murder someone is a crime even if you don't succeed (look up Joss Stone in the news), but killing someone by sheer accident likely is not a crime at all. Intent is as important as end result, if not more so.

Killing someone by accident is what is known as involuntary manslaughter. It's illegal, regardless of intent.

So, where's the law which says that providing links to download material is illegal? There isn't one in the UK (and I'm fairly sure that there isn't one in the US either).

If you want it banning, then legislate against it.

[d000hg]

Killing someone by accident is only manslaughter if it's due to your negligence.

[TheFaQQer]

Killing someone by accident is only manslaughter if it's due to your negligence.

Nope.

Recklessness, negligence, any other unlawful act, death by dangerous driving.

So, since intent is irrelevant for killing someone, why do you think it's relevant when links appear on a website?

[d000hg]

Nope.

Recklessness, negligence, any other unlawful act, death by dangerous driving.

Splitting hairs... if you drive dangerously or recklessly that is negligence. Go back to my original point which is that it does not automatically mean you committed a crime if your car kills someone (for instance they jump in front on purpose).

So, since intent is irrelevant for killing someone, why do you think it's relevant when links appear on a website?

Even in your tortured argument, intent is relevant... manslaughter is considered considerably less serious than murder purely because the intent is there in the latter.

Why don't you just admit you like stealing and are too tight to pay?

[TheFaQQer]

Splitting hairs... if you drive dangerously or recklessly that is negligence. Go back to my original point which is that it does not automatically mean you committed a crime if your car kills someone (for instance they jump in front on purpose).

Actually, your original point (post three) was that Virgin were blocking illegal sites. TPB is no more illegal than Google is.

Now why don't you go back to your illegal DVD ripping.