However, to be restrictive on intellectual property negatively stifiles imitation, which is the very basis of artistic development. If there had been such a strong aura of intellectual property in ancient days, Vergil would have had his ass sued off by the Homeridai. After all, the Aeneid essentially amounts to Homer fanfiction. Or, look only at the joke in the other thread about how Milton and Dante recieve a C&D from God for infringing on Biblical copyrights. The point is, I don't think arts should be viewed as a business.
And before you get all high and mighty about growing up and going to college, take note that traditionally - and I believe this wholeheartedly - Business has absolutely no place in college. So don't go lording it up as though you were some master. The point is, though, that the concept that IP should be free is a philosophical one, not a business one, and in the end no number of courses in the field are going to help you sort through that ethical predicament. What many have pointed out is that SE is well within their rights for doing what they do. Yes, they are, according to the laws, they are. Yet that does not make their actions ethically right. See, there was a time when holding a slave and abusing a slave was not only legal but desirable under the law. Now, are you willing to say that those who abused slaves were within their rights because, under the law codes of the time, they were allowed to do such a thing? See, I think the problem people have with SE's actions is that they have a problem with the codified laws as they are, those very ones to which SE has recourse. And just because it's law, doesn't make it right.
Now I'm not a socialist in mentality. But regarding the arts, I do think there should be more freedom for the sake of development. You say it does not make a corporation evil because they are in it to make money. However, you have made a grave error in making these statements. You are treating the matter as a business fact, assuming a prori that if it is legal under the law it is right. However, to say 'they are not evil' is a moral judgment. And here's the main issue with what you are saying. Those who are objecting are objecting on the grounds of a moral stance that disagrees with the current laws, indeed saying that the laws themselves are morally wrong, hence evil. Therefore your statement that they are not evil because they follow the set laws has no bearing.
Personally, if I wrote something - for writing is more my artistic forte - and published it, and someone without asking took that world or ideas and wrote something of their own without asking, and did something wonderful with it, good for them. I think it would be morally wrong of me to set profit over the good of humanity which is garnered by the addition of a new work of art. The problem we have is that we have set profit to the highest point. Of course, if you are in business, you will almost certainly disagree with me, as maximizing profit is your particular skill... yet important as that might be to the functioning of our society, I cannot help but say that there are more important gains to be made. After all, if profit had not been considered, we'd have been in the Industrial Revolution two thousand years ago. Hero of Alexandria built a steam engine in antiquity, after all. But it was never implimented. After all, there were slaves. Living machines in the view of the law that could be used and abused. It was more profitable to use them rather than some mechanical contraption. The rule of that economic force potentially held back humanity for thousands of years. Likewise the use of sources of energy other than oil. Economics, therefore, while serving the individual profit very well, might have a negative influence on humanity as a whole. The same might be said in a situation as this. While it might be profitable for SE to do what they do, for their own sake, it might diminish the progression of the art, and take something away from humanity. They, in that sense, are hoarding a good that should not belong to them, but commonly to all people.
Could that not be called evil?
