That is not what I said. I feel that it isn't morally wrong to download something that you cannot afford, and would never buy in the first place. This is a moral argument, it is entirely subjective and we clearly aren't going to agree.
I didn't say that it is only wrong when other people break these laws. I clearly stated that it is legally wrong for everyone, including myself.
Are you trying to deliberately misrepresent my position?
I think it's morally reprehensible to put yourself in the position of making the judgment "oh well, I wouldn't pay for it anyway, therefore I'll take it for free." I cannot see any way in which that judgment cannot end up being self-serving and false.
If you chose to obey the law--without exception--would that mean that you had no entertainment at all? No--others have pointed out the myriad affordable ways in which you could listen to music and play computer games without breaking the law. But more importantly: can you honestly say that if none of this music or these games was available to you in pirated form that you would never buy any music or any games? I frankly do not believe it. There are some albums and some games that you would scrimp and save to buy. There are some other discretionary purchases you would cut back on in order to free up money for music and games (do you never, ever buy a restaurant meal or a cup of coffee? Never ever order in when you
could cook yourself? Always buy the cheapest possible food and the cheapest possible products for the house? I frankly doubt it.) All that would happen is that you would have a smaller number of albums to listen to as you see fit or you would have to listen to a wider array of music that is not entirely available at your whim (e.g. LastFM).
In other words, you'd be like people were in the days before easy digital piracy, when you had to listen to the radio if you wanted easy access to music youd didn't personally own, and you had to save up to buy the LPs when you wanted to own them. Guess what, even back then people who were struggling to get by would slowly build up their record collections. And somehow they survived listening to the radio (even though radios played a far less personalized set of songs than you can get on Last.fm etc.). And it was possible for bands to make a living from the albums they sold.
And lastly: if you think it's perfectly acceptable to download pirated music, why don't you upload it as well? If the people uploading it are committing a moral (as well as legal) wrong, in your view, how can it not be morally wrong for you to profit from that action?
The fact is, nobody who illegally downloads music actually thinks that what they're doing is o.k. That's why they always try to come up with these bizarre and baroque justifications for their actions. It's also why they get so incredibly pissed off with anyone who simply and accurately describes what they're doing: stealing something that doesn't belong to them.
