View Single Post
Old 04-18-2009, 07:04 PM   #789
PKFFW
Wizard
PKFFW ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PKFFW ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PKFFW ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PKFFW ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PKFFW ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PKFFW ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PKFFW ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PKFFW ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PKFFW ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PKFFW ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.PKFFW ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 3,792
Karma: 33500000
Join Date: Dec 2008
Device: BeBook, Sony PRS-T1, Kobo H2O
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerospinboson View Post
Yes, assent by one person coupled with silence from the rest indeed is the same as unanimous consent. Glad we could clear that up too.
Not sure of how the latin goes but the translation is something like..."He who is silent is taken to consent". Another way of saying if you disagree with something you should speak up, otherwise how is anyone to know?
Quote:
Nothing? I call BS. If the books/music made nobody any money, there wouldn't be any supposed moral issues either.
Similarly if authors only got a lump sum payment for producing a book, and corporations made the rest. Would you still care? Or would you say "sorry, guys, your business model is outdated. Evolve or die."
Because subsidizing industries that don't keep up with the times is not in the interest of the people, just in the interest of politicians, lobbyists and the corporations themselves.
Look at what the protectionism (through artificially keeping gasoline costs low) did for the US automaker industry. Stagnation that will cost tens of billions now to correct, as they probably won't be allowed to die.
Supporting Copyright is not the same as supporting a business model, nor should it be confused to be.
Yep, nothing at all. Sorry to say.

Firstly, how much money is made from a work is not the deciding factor in whether one has the moral right to take that work without fair recompense. For example if I patent a new invention but do not make any money from it that does not give you the right to take that patent and use it without my permission and without payment and I would argue that to do so would be wrong.

Secondly, I did say your assertion that file sharing will lead to more sales is most likely correct. That is not the point though. I think we all agree on here that the industry must evolve or die.

My example was to clarify if those who support the moral right of the individual to "file share" other peoples work due to the arguments put forward actually think it is right or if it is justified(which is completely different). Obviously, by your own admission, you do believe the act of "file sharing"(got to love that euphemism by the way) to be wrong.

Cheers,
PKFFW
PKFFW is offline   Reply With Quote