Quote:
Originally Posted by cian
So you don't have a moral object to file-sharing, you have a legal objection. Which was the only point I was making. Logically it follows from this that if the law on libraries was changed s.t. they were no longer legal, you'd object to them also. Right?
|
You just love putting words in peoples mouth and then arguing from that don't you?
Please provide a quote or link to any place I said either;
a: I don't have a moral objection to file-sharing or;
b: I have a legal objection to file-sharing.
As I never said either of the above it in no way "logically follows" that I would object to libraries if the law was changed to make them illegal.
As I said in my above post, my point is not about moral rights, legal rights or any other such thing.
My point(which was directed to someone else entirely btw) was about the argument used to justify file-sharing being invalid for the reasons I gave. That is it.
All the rest you have assumed, guessed at, completely made up and used faulty logic apparently based on things I never posted to extrapolate yet further erroneous interpretations.
Cheers,
PKFFW