What is legal in one place is not necessarily legal in another place.

Sadly it is in some countries. Also in the US and other so called civilized countries there are all sorts of old laws on the books which make various things illegal that we do every day. Should we follow them too?
You made some sweet hyperbole and he responded with same. Problem?

I didn't make some sweet hyperbole I employed irony.

On a side note, does this mean that my boxed copy of Syndicate Plus is worth money even if it's the Electronic Arts Classics release? You learn something new every day.

Same difference.
Probably to some collector. To me it's about 30-40 bucks too much. wink wink

No, an hyperbole would mean that I actually believed what I wrote and exagerated it.

You exagerated for effect...same thing.

Okay I give up, think what you want I'm out of this discussion.

So I win? Yay! *claps*

/silly mode off

I'm sorry. I thought his point was that following the law is not always moral, and you then made a fucking asinine response about rape, so I made an equally asinine response about slavery.

Can we all agree laws are fucking stupid sometimes?

Be happy this isn't some ripoff joint like Chuck-E-Cheese where the games cost 4 quar...tokens, most are broken, the seats on the racing games are covered in snot and sticky shit, bathrooms are messy, staff are jerks, the prizes are cheap plastic crap, and the only thing good is the food(which will still make you fat).

Abandonware is legal. The problem is that 99% of the time it's applied to games that haven't been abandoned - thus piracy.

While copyright infringement is illegal, the full ownership of System Shock 2 seems to be uncertain right now.

This means that it might not even be possible to determine if free distribution goes against the wishes of the rights holder - given that who holds the rights hasn't been fully established. Leaving it in a bit of a grey area, as civil law requires action on the part of the rights holder.

No one must agree about ANYTHING....EVER....lest we rouse the old one from their tortured feverish slumber. 0-o

If I may ... ?

You made a good point, through employing irony, in showing that accepting personal exceptions for following laws can easily lead to an ethics disaster. You brought that across pretty well.

StingingVelvet then topped you by using the very same technique to show that blindly following the law can lead to an ethics disaster as well.

You both have shown pretty well that law and ethics pose problems that can't be solved easily. StingingVelvet probably "won" that particular debate by having the last word (and it hardly can't be topped any further), but you should be able to take that in strike. He's not even attacking your view, he's just pointing out that matters aren't as black white - just like you did with regard to the first post you quoted.

Interesting discussion btw.