I have little consideration as to what copyright infringement means, since the definition was made, lobbied and pushed by corporations. They are judge, juror and executioner. So the definition cannot be upheld to defend all parties and interests but only one side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
Contrary to what some people seem to think, copyright infringement does not require a profit motive. The offence is still the same, regardless of whether you give it away for free, or charge for it.
|