You are the guy that called copyright law a bad law at the beginning of this thread. Go back and read it....I said it's bad if it prevented me from sharing my music with my wife.
You're also the guy that said swapping happened because the RIAA charges too much.
Not so. I said that swapping happened because the difference between the store price and the "free" price were too great. Swapping would decrease (that's the goal) by shortening this gap.
Your papaphrasing shows your intent.
So, back to the drawing board. BTW, stu, you have already admitted (in this very thread) that you were wrong to assert that I was defending thieves. Are you changing positions, AGAIN???
So you went out of your way to make an inaccurate attack on copyright law, but the fact that your example was wrong means it wasn't really an attack and you weren't really trying to say copyright law was bad? Am I properly interpreting the Clinton spinmachine here?
So when you said the music is stolen because free is cheaper than any price that can ever be charged that wasn't an excuse ofr thieves that was simply typing for the joy of seeing characters appear on the screen?
I'm beginning to understand. Anything you say that's BS, just plain wrong and easily refuted you actually meant the refutation not what you said. Anything you say that isn't refuted is actually what you meant.
You sure you don't want to run your position by some focus groups to see how it sells on the coast?