am i allowed to give away a legally bought ebook?

[Marseille]

Originally Posted by elcreative

OK so I am totally wrong... proof please... reliable source (preferably sources) to show that Apple wanted DRM...

I'd feel obligated to back it up with some neural scan of Steve Jobs' brain if I'd stated it as a fact. I stand by my post as an educated opinion backed by circumstantial evidence already laid out twice. You have no more evidence for your opinion (media reports based on the word of a media-savvy company heavily incentivized to spin their communications) than I have for mine (incentives based on the results they achieved -- which is exactly the sort of evidence you use to prove intent in a court of law. Sophisticated company that has a long history of economic success utilizes DRM tool, through doing so achieves particular expected economic benefit, ergo the most likely explanation is that such a sophisticated company understood the relationship between the tool and the result and wanted to achieve it.).

[elcreative]

End discussion... anecdote = opinion... keep yours, I'll keep mine as I've got better things to do than waste time arguing with someone "who's right."
If it was important (or paid research) I'd carry on but I waste too much time on this forum anyway...

Originally Posted by David Marseilles

I'd feel obligated to back it up with some neural scan of Steve Jobs' brain if I'd stated it as a fact. I stand by my post as an educated opinion backed by circumstantial evidence already laid out twice. You have no more evidence for your opinion (media reports based on the word of a media-savvy company heavily incentivized to spin their communications) than I have for mine (incentives based on the results they achieved -- which is exactly the sort of evidence you use to prove intent in a court of law. Sophisticated company that has a long history of economic success utilizes DRM tool, through doing so achieves particular expected economic benefit, ergo the most likely explanation is that such a sophisticated company understood the relationship between the tool and the result and wanted to achieve it.).

[Marseille]

No matter how many times I see "oh I could prove you wrong in this argument that I started and ended with ad hominem attacks, but my time is suddenly oh-so valuable" line on the internet, it never ceases to amuse. It's like when a politician resigns to spend more time with their family.

My issue with you isn't that you're wrong, it's that you couldn't stand someone having a different opinion. That other person "knows" about "Evil Apple" and is someone "who's right" to the extent they can hear nothing else. To add insult to injury, you accuse me of your own arrogance. I stand by my opinion, and argued in favor of it. This is rather distinct from your abject dismissal and condescension (and those charming quotation marks) of my position, and it is that attitude, not your opinion, that rubs me the wrong way. Good luck with whatever more worthy goal you'll be spending your time on though.

[elcreative]

Grow up... I responded to your arguments and you resorted to personal attacks (and have done so again) in an irritating enough fashion to get a reply... I said keep your own opinion, you have that right but it still doesn't amount to a fact... you said it, it's an opinion.

[Marseille]

Originally Posted by elcreative

Never mind HarryT, you're arguing with someone who "knows" all about 'Evil Apple" so never lets the facts get in the way of rhetorical statements...

This is where it started. With your personal attack and condescension, something that you're capable of dishing out, but got whiny about when I wouldn't lie down and take it. I've had this argument before, so I know that despite your repeated claims to be done with this conversation, you'll still want the last word. Feel free (when I say I'm done, I actually mean it), but for the record, I still remember how it really went down no matter how much you'd like to blame me:

I did not ignore any facts in reasoning through to my opinion despite your quoted assertion to the contrary. I merely compared reports to the surrounding facts and circumstances and through independent reasoning decided the reports were less credible than reasonable inferences drawn from the results of Apple's (and hundreds of other DRM-using company's) experiences. I never claimed my opinion was factual, but you insisted that your differing opinion was factual because it was reported in the press, a logical fallacy known as an appeal to authority (with shades of appeal to majority).

Originally Posted by elcreative

Weirdly, you seem to have missed a factual point... Apple didn't want DRM... this received wide coverage at the time on the 'net, in the press and TV news and documentaries...

Originally Posted by David Marseilles

That it was reported is a fact. That it was true is not.

In the end, what really happened was that you assumed I was attacking Apple because Apple is Apple. You were wrong inasmuch as I'd already confessed mere posts before admiration for what they accomplished as well as the hope that others would follow their lead, but once confronted with the reality that I wasn't who you off-handedly and lazily assumed I was, you couldn't admit to that tiny error and just have a conversation as between two equals. Such is a loss to us both. My favorite conversations have always been with those who hold differing opinions to my own, and I would have been happy to chat further with HarryT or you, if you could have seen me as a human rather than your caricature.