Quote:
Originally Posted by mr ploppy
But it does give them the motive to perform a copyright violation. Which seems to be his point. If you take away the motive to violate copyright you will reduce the volume of copyright violations. Makes sense to me, and judging by the recent jump in music industry profits it seems to have worked for them.
|
I'm not disagreeing with that actually. But the dog jumped on me about "it's the medical/pill approach" which clearly indicated he was not even following along.
I'm not going to repeat it all again, it's there to read.
Oh and Piper. It this has EVERYTHING to do with rights. The rights of the one who creates the work and the rights of the publisher. The consumer has some rights but not to demand the things you and dog seems to be claiming.
The product belongs to the publisher. They get to decide what to offer to the consumer. If the consumer doesn't like the terms they can choose to go elsewhere, but that does not give them the right to break the law.
See how it really is all about rights? Copyrights and other rights.