You obviously still lied as your own posts prove have been defending Stallman for years, and you do not respect intellectual property or copyright protections like DRM, despite your claims to the contrary. You have even outright admitted to lying in defense of illegal hacking, for you to think this is any of this is actually still being debated is hysterical LMAO. The record is clear, and intact. Here you are claiming there should be no IP at all, again:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1372993/posts?page=62#62
"BTW, there would be no IP if Jefferson had had his way, since he was afraid that even a limited monopoly would be abused. And he was right."
Context again. The context is that "IP"* is not property in the real sense. Its constitutional basis (yes, "IP"* stems directly from the Constitution) is to "advance the arts and sciences." To help that advance, a limited monopoly is given. Jefferson was afraid even a limited monopoly would be abused. And he was clearly correct. The Constitution assumed the honesty of Congress and the courts to follow the clear intent of the Constitution, and both did for over a hundred years. But not anymore.
* Hilights why "IP" should never be used. Trademark is "IP" but it has no constitutional basis. Trademark is essentially a consumer protection device to prevent confusion in the marketplace. Corporate secrets, also lumped under "IP" also have no constitutional basis, and therefore also don't fall under the same social compact restrictions that copyright and patent do.
BTW, no response to your very obvious instance of taking my earlier post out of context? You get caught with a lie and simply sidestep it and continue with more lies. That is your pattern.