It really is about morality and the fear.
It is about the haves and the have not’s.
It’s about the middle class eating its self.
When hasn’t theft been about rationalizing morals?
And it’s always specific to the context of the situation.
In this situation should Sara get all the great games while Johnny’s gets the sale items from the used bin?
I think they should both get all the games.
But I don’t think that Johnny’s parents should break the law to get those games.
(They should really rise above the situation, that’s morals…)
Well, today Johnny’s the one who’s stealing the games.
His parents don’t know what “burning an iso” really means as long as it’s not the house or the school.
Johnny works as a dishwasher after school and the weekends.
Johnny’s mom is a waitress and his dad is an unemployed aircraft mechanic.
Johnny’s smart, real smart, but he knows his destiny is community college because he’s not an athlete superstar
and he won’t get rocket scientist scores on his SAT’s.
Sara’s dad owns the deed to Johnny’s parent’s house.
(just rolling with the whole Bourgeioisie vs. Prolatariat thing)
So, instead of fearing what lurks in the darkness of the p2p world…
What Johnny should do in the “dog eat dog world” is get to know Sara.
You see that way he at least gets access to a few more games.
And you never know what else…