- Filesharing -- legal
- Filesharing public domain or uncopyrightable material -- legal
- Filesharing copyrighted materials -- legal
- Filesharing copyrighted materials for which you have a license to do so (such as GPL or CC-BY-SA) -- legal
- Filesharing copyrighted materials for which you do not have a license to do so: Illegal. This is what the entire debate should about. Everything else is clearly legal, and we should fully support it. Everything here is basically illegal. The question is whether its morally right or wrong. I can think of at least one example where I would call it morally OK:
- Filesharing copyrighted materials for which you do not have a license to do so, but public good compels you to do so, e.g. Diebold memos.
- Other filesharing: This is what the majority of the suits target. I don't support this type of filesharing. I don't think fc.o should either. First, even if all the suits were dismissed and there were to be no more for a while, we still woudn't have won. Music that you can only download for your own personal use, and even then not quite legally, is not free music. People still can't rework it, mix it together, and make something new, because as soon as that becomes big, they'd get sued. I actually like the suits, as it raises awareness. We just need to get the word out that there are alternatives. In addition, supporting this type of filesharing weakens our credibility. --LukeStodola 22:24, 17 Apr 2005 (EDT)
Please comment and flesh it out.