To: mhking
When you buy a song or a movie, you are not really the new owner of that work; you are merely a licensee. The proponents of digital theft apparently feel that someone can spend a year and millions of dollars producing a work and then is only entitled to sell one copy of that work. Or is even that considered greed? Everyone else who wants a free copy is entitled to it?
Anyone else see the irony in Kazaa complaining about copyright infringement?
To: Jack Wilson
Everyone else who wants a free copy is entitled to it?Then why am I able to burn a copy onto CD for my own backup? Or are you telling me that's illegal too?
Anyone else see the irony in Kazaa complaining about copyright infringement?
Indeed. But some would insist it's a matter of degrees.
27 posted on
09/03/2003 8:12:20 AM PDT by
mhking
(Kazaa/Sharmann has alterior motives.)
To: Jack Wilson
When you buy a song or a movie, you are not really the new owner of that work; you are merely a licensee. You mean the buyer doesn't own the physical object, the CD, DVD, the box they came in, the cover? That is to say, he's not free to do as he likes with them? Call the cops if he accidentally tears a CD cover? What exactly is being licensed?
36 posted on
09/03/2003 3:23:34 PM PDT by
Revolting cat!
(Go ahead, make my day and re-state the obvious! Again!)
To: Jack Wilson
Anyone else see the irony in Kazaa complaining about copyright infringement? I saw it right off.
But I was having too much fun reading the thread to bother mentioning it...until you did.
I always love a little after dinner irony.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson