On January 16, 2004 03:56 pm, Charles Gregory wrote: > On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Pedro Sam wrote: > > Here's another analogy, I leave my legally owned and licensed firearm > > in plain view in the fore mentioned car. Robbers then proceed to > > steal my big ass gun and rob a bank ... well, you see where this is > > headed. > > I can see where you are trying to FORCE it. But your pathetic attempt to > equate a common household appliance to a dangerous weapon is just that - > pathetic. Carry this to its logical, absurd extreme: If someone broke > into MY house, stole my COMPUTER, and then used it to unleash a virus onto > the internet, why the hell would I be liable for that criminal MISuse of > something that I owned and cared for as a simple TOOL in my home?
ok ... > Normal gun handling requires that even at home we lock up the gun. > Do you lock up your toaster? Do you padlock your fridge or VCR? > When you BUY them, are you told there are restrictions and regulations > governing their use? Let's think about the VCR before we answer. There > actually ARE regulations about VCR's. Things you may not copy or create. Those regulations were enacted in recognition of the serious responsibility of owning a firearm. The internet is still fairly young, perhaps we will see similar responsibilities for owing an IP address, either directly by the user or the ISP ... > So hey, you leave your VCR on the front seat of the car, and someone > steals it and uses it to make pirated videos and sells them, are YOU > liable for it? Your whole reasoning process is flawed by the fact that > computers are not inherently dangerous until someone commits a criminal > act to make them so. The only thing you have approaching an 'argument' is > that telecommunications have made the 'theft' of my computer easy to do > and easy to do un-noticed. And this is at best an argument for educating > people on the potential mis-use of their appliances. We all learn not to > play with matches. But we don't get sued for the damage when someone > steals them and uses them to commit arson. Not even if they were sitting > in the front of an unlocked car. ... > I agree that people could *really* use some education on this subject. > I work helpdesk. I *do* that every day. But the idea of suing people for > not having been educated? Stupid. Why don't you sue the computer > manufacturers for failing to include proper *instructions* on the > necessity of installing additional software? Or better still, why not > sue the computer/software manufacturers for producing an unsafe product? > Now THERE is an argument for culpability..... I'm not entirely for regulating the internet, but simultaneously I recognize the awsome responsibility of operating a public IP address. Remember, with great powers comes great responsibilities. Pedro PS: chill ... I wasn't trying to be mean before, gotta put in more emot-icons ... :) -- The revolution will not be televised. ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
