Quote:
Originally Posted by BoldlyDubious
Why a criminal? I want you (and everyone else) to be treated like an adult, responsible person. About "being marked for life", this is what I wrote in my proposal: When a buyer gets fined for illegal distribution at time Y, she/he cannot be fined again for illegal distribution of files she/he bought before time Y. So you are not marked at all. You get one single fine, and that's it. Finished :-) |
You just don't get it. You want people to be punished for ACTIONS OVER WHICH THEY HAVE NO CONTROL. The choice is either to NEVER let a file out of one's possession--which isn't necessarily possible even if one never willingly shares--or to open oneself to punishment and legal action.
Quote:
In this contex, "damage" is economic damage. The economic damage caused to publishers from illegal distribution of media is the reason why we are getting oppressed by silly (though hardly working) DRM schemes and -worst- because publishers are lobbying to get absurd (and dangerous for democracy) laws passed.
This is not silly at all.
|
What's silly is your proposal and you absolute unwillingness to see that there is NO BENEFIT to the consumer in this scheme, no matter how many words you expend.
Quote:
|
What?!? By your definition of blame, if anyone gets robbed it's always her/his own fault if that happened...
|
That is YOUR definition. That is the result of YOUR proposal. You say it's up to the owner of the file to take all necessary precautions or to face the consequences. How can you not recognize your own proposal?