View Single Post
Old 06-11-2015, 05:04 PM   #76
eschwartz
Ex-Helpdesk Junkie
eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
eschwartz's Avatar
 
Posts: 19,421
Karma: 85400180
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: The Beaten Path, USA, Roundworld, This Side of Infinity
Device: Kindle Touch fw5.3.7 (Wifi only)
Why do I get the impression that there are several people who have horribly misunderstood what I said?

A rights-holder can pull their product from the market. ingmar's proposed legislation takes away that right by legalizing unauthorized copies if the rights-holder exercises that right.

No one has ever implied that a rights-holder is or should be able to:
  • forbid a sale retroactively
  • sell only to a selective subset of the population. Except apparently if it is digital meda.
  • forbid resale of an already-purchased item. Except apprently if it is digital media.

Whatever. I certainly don't understand how anyone could possibly say:
Quote:
It's only for these "download things" that they think they have that right.
Could that statement have possibly been more backward?
eschwartz is offline   Reply With Quote