Originally Posted by Fluribus
That's a fair restatement of Mivo's point. But wouldn't that also be true for the information that BREIN is seeking. BREIN wouldn't be taking a tangible object, just a copy. I'm sure that BREIN could truthfully claim "We never would have paid you for it."
Since the statement is so ridiculous, I'll assume you were joking...except it's not funny, so maybe I should reply.
The objection to BREIN trying to force retailers to provide client information is that it is a violation of privacy, not that they're not willing to pay to acquire it. Furthermore, neither Mivo nor I argued that a copyright infringement that does no harm (because the copier was not going to buy the book under any circumstances) wasn't an infringement. Just as paying for information that violates privacy laws doesn't mean it is not an infringement on those laws.