>i know this is yesterday's news.... but > the very fact that we were discussing getting hold of his >unpublished (?) works suggests that although we may be treading around >the law, there is a moral issue at stake. much as im unhappy about to >say this, to go around mailing his stuff around willy nilly (when we >know he probably wounldnt like it) is rather like saying "we respect >you- we just dont respect your wishes and beliefs." > (or is that utter rubbish?) i could see a moral dilemma if we were talking about manuscripts someone had stole from his house after breaking it but he wrote them and published them in magazines don't you think that means he wants people to read them? he went so far as to publish them but they're hard to find, so the people who have come across them then go and share them...where's the betrayal in that? he published them! you think he'd be sitting in his house going , "goddammit, those jerks are reading that stuff i wrote and put in major magazines!!! how could they!?!?"