> but you are at least RESPECTING THE LICENSES!
So what? The output is the same.
> And you are not taking money AWAY from copyrights holders.
No one who shares illegaly takes *away* money from the copyright holders.
The amount of money in their pocket stays the same if a friend gives you a
jamendo.de song or a copy from lady gaga.
Taking away money from the copyright holders would be theft, that's true, but
I can't imagine how this should be even possible.
> quantumgravity, you are an asshole and you make only harm to everyone who
comes to this forum.
Well, spoken from your mouth, this sounds like a compliment!
I really thought you just had a emotional knock-out last time we had the
piracy discussion, but perhaps you calmed down.
Now I see you have a massive choleric problem; I just hope for you it's
because you're very young (I don't know) since this could improve.
You're behaving like you were fifteen years old, sorry.
But feel free to insult me as you wish. This harms you, not me, since
everyone can see the deficit of your character. And your welcome doing harm
to yourself as many times you like. For me, it's very funny entertainment.
> So, you are supporting the idea that we should not respect licenses unless
we like them
And you are supporting the idea that we should respect every shit put in
front of our nose.
Perhaps authors want me in a few years to write a letter to them asking for
permission everytime I read the copy of my book.
Well, we really should obey or just say: bye bye books!
We can't disrespect their licences, no we can't!
Even if technology passes on and big companies want to stick to outdated
business models.
And to your argument that sharing illegaly harms CC projects:
I don't think listening to vivaldi will magically stop a musician far away
producing his own stuff.
I don't see any logical connection.
