Skip to content

Comment on NVD3 Erased From Existenceparent

Comments

If you "copy" the bits that happen to open up access to my bank account, I'm not likely to use the word "copy", I'm going to say "stolen" and involve the police.

Similarly, if you "copy" the bits that I'm trying to monetize (they're a book, or a movie, or a computer program), I will also prefer the word "steal" and likewise involve the police.

Just because a low-level mechanism ("hey, we /copy/ bits, we don't destroy them! You still have them!") enables behavior on your part does not make that behavior ethical or lawful, nor does it imply that the notion that someone can control ownership of mere bits is bankrupt or delusional.

"Stealing" as applied to physical property involves two elements: it must be unauthorised by the owner, and it deprives the owner of the thing.

So I wouldn't define your password as stolen, just "known". As soon as the perp used it to take money from your account, then stealing has occurred.

"Stealing" is a very loaded word, which is why big media is desperate to frame their business problems using it. And in this case, I doubt many people would consider those who used NVD3 were guilty of stealing, given that a) they had been authorised to use it (as far as they knew), and b) they haven't deprived Novus of anything.

If you "don't read" my book, I'm going to call that "stealing". After all, if you had read it, I would have gotten $20, and I didn't get my $20, so you must have stolen something from me.

(Do you see how insane this is?)

(facepalm)

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.