Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonist
Why should the personal liberties of society be so significantly threatened, to protect rights-holders.
|
Mmm... because society takes advantage of rights-holders, to the point of removing any incentive to create for society, without some protections. IOW, if I create something, and all you have to do is knock me over the head and take it, why should I bother?
(And, of course, "rights-holders" are clearly not members of society in this argument, so I guess their protection doesn't count...)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonist
The market works pretty well: at some optimum price the seller will realize sufficient profit to stay in the business, and a majority of interested potential purchasers will pay for the product. As you move the price higher, less and less interested potential purchasers will pay for the product - some will chose an alternative, others will "pirate."
Many rights-holders would love the government to protect their monopoly at any cost, so that they can maximize their profit. I am sure some would support eye-gouging for "piracy."
But why would anyone reasonable be surprised that many of us find such scheme noxious?
And, as someone else pointed out, this is not intended to help Steve Jordan, but rather Disney and Time Warner.
|
Presently, a great deal of copywritten property like music and ebooks (including my own) are selling for lower amounts than they've sold for as physical entities... prices have stabilized or come down, yet still, "society" takes the creations and pirates them without paying for them.
Clearly the "market" is stealing simply because they know they can get away with it, and only supporting laws that will continue to let them do so. Their real issue is only one thing: They don't want to have to pay for stuff they want. All the Big Brother nonsense is just trying to scare the masses (and obviously doing a good job of it, too).
But that's just my take.
At any rate, maybe the government's "incentive" for these laws is Disney and Time Warner... and
let's just say they don't deserve to have their property protected by law... but does that mean I don't deserve protection of my property, for the same reason? Do I deserve to be crushed under the boot that would grind them into the dirt?
Am I not considered a valued member of society, deserving of its protections just like anyone else? And since "society" is not giving me those protections, is it not fair to create laws that protect my rights, just as laws are created to protect the disadvantaged, the challenged, and the innocent?