Replies

And I said "similar" several times also..

His scenario had us working from a "picture" (his quote)

Music "sharing" OTOH, involves making an exact duplicate of someone elses work in direct violation of the US code.

It's illegal and it's illegal for a reason.

He's not "building" his "own" music with a band in his garage, he's instead ripping off the music someone else "built"

That's crooked and he even admits such.

Ok, what you are saying now is you are replicating an existing boat.

We are getting way off now. But here goes. I am sure you have seen the Kit cars (Lamborghini , Ferrari etc) that are built on Pontiac Fiero chassis. Lamborghini has sued successfully some kit manufacturers under infringement laws. And these guys just sell the bodys for the conversion.

I have worked with record labels and film studios, their application of these IP laws are very different than what your proposing. The common issue is monetary damages from the infringement. This must be proven and is difficult to do.

Music "sharing" OTOH, involves making an exact duplicate of someone elses work in direct violation of the US code.

moehoward said that if you made a copy of the boat, then you'd be in violation of copyright. You told him to prove it, but then in the next breath you claim that if you made a copy of the song, then you'd be in violation (but you didn't give any evidence to prove it). You're contradicting yourself (claiming copying goods X for your own use doesn't violate, but copying goods Y for your own use does).

He's not "building" his "own" music with a band in his garage, he's instead ripping off the music someone else "built".

Yes, actually, I am building my own music. The tools for the boat are hammer and screwdriver. The tools for the song is a computer and software. The materials for the boat are board and nail and screw. The materials for the song are bits and data space on the hard drive. The tools and materials may differ, but it's still building a copy from your own materials, time and tools. They're topologically equivalent. Tossing out terms like "ripping off" doesn't change that fact.

That's crooked and he even admits such.

Oh, I'm sorry. Didn't you know? Ad hominems and putting words (falsely) in other people's mouths only makes your argument look bad, and doesn't affect the validity of my arguments. I said copying of songs was a breach of copyright. I didn't say (as you're trying to infer) that it was theft.

-The Hajman-