So, you are for censorship? I thought you called me Taliban because I believe in censoring art in civil societies.
I believe that once a person buys an item, even if it is copyrighted, that person’s private property rights supersede the copyright law as long as it is not used for profit—copied and sold, although he could sell it at a garage sale. I think the person can alter it, burn it, destroy it and be within his rights, since freedom in our country means the ability to have private property and have the freedom to do with it what you desire.
We really become fascist when we decide what a person can do in the privacy of their own home which absolutely undermines the meaning of freedom. Copyrighted material has a right to profit and be compensated for, but no right to dictate how it is personally used....if they want to use it for toilet paper, sobeit.
The intrusiveness which we see in current copyright legislation was largely pressed by ostensibly panicky publishing interests at the advent of potentially threatening technologies, such as the photocopier, cheap film, consumer grade digital technologies, and the like. Perhaps ironically, it has gotten to the point where the average otherwise fair minded person is on the verge of saying “screw it” to a system that virtually requires your own personal lawyer to watch all the baby steps required to keep your nose clean — and at long last the cheating really is eating into publishers’ bottom line to a non trivial extent.