On 28 Jun 2005 at 12:55, Bruce Rice wrote: > ... <some stuff deleted> > Those who pirate music and provide it to others, are just as guilty as > those of the Supreme Court case, > ... <some stuff deleted> > ===================================================== > > Hmmmm..., I just had a thought. > (I know, uncommon but true.) > Of all the PCs I've worked on - literally hundreds - I don't remember a > single one that was 100% legit. > > Grannies with Mom's recipe programs, teens with MP3s, kids playing Barbie on > two different PCs using a copy by Dad, IT folks with all kinds of latest and > greatest apps copied to CD and USB drives to make their jobs a bit easier, > 10 salesmen sharing 1 copy of PcAnywhere, preachers with Bible Verse on all > the PCs - same serial number. > The list goes on-and-on-and-on. > I wonder how long it will be before Big Bro shows up and drags Granny away? > Shame, Granny, Shame.
Well, it depends: if you have 35 million illegal items on your computer and you distribute them, they'll probably come after you. If you have several thousand computers "sharing" [sic] a single license, they'll come after you. There's a matter of scale that I don't understand why so many folk are SO blind to. > The fact that Hollywood and the RIAA have big bucks and want to claim their > fortunes are X% less this year because of piracy is ridiculous. They don't have to claim that, directly, actually. The mere fact that the illegal copying is *happening* is actually sufficient to bring the copyright suit. Demonstrating damages afffects the award, but not the fact. Are you seriously trying to argue that what grokster and friends do is 'fair use'? > The percentage of folks that dl movies are so small that it can't affect > them enough to pay their lawyers/lobbyists. Hmmm... do you actually have statistics on that? What percentage of folk that use Grokster [or relatives] use it *solely* [or even at all!] for legitimate purposes? How many of the 100 gigs of multimedia files posted EVERY DAY on usenet are legitimate copies? the only debate, I think, isn't the fact of the illegal copying, but only the damages due to it [I love the "I wouldn't have bought it anyway so it was OK to take it" like of apologetic] > What they really need to look at is the $4 cokes and $7.50 popcorn and the > $10 tickets. Heck, I can't justify going to the movies unless it's > extraordinarily good (and I eat at home prior to seeing the movie). > > In a perfect world I'd say "NO PIRACY". > Unfortunately, this world is far from perfect, the system is ruled by big > money and they still push the limits - seems like the prices just leap each > time I do brave the financial hurdles and go see a movie. Maybe the cost of > gasoline is driving those prices up? (Another area of cartel thievery, but I > digress.) Are you suggesting the somewhat amusing apologetic "I think it is too expensive so it is OK just to take it?". The usual answer if you think something is too expensive is not to buy it, but I guess not in the age of "I ought to be able to have it for free".... > So, anyhow, I think the voters may well be the last bastion of freedom for > the people, because the Government has shown it simply doesn't have a clue, > or scruples or brains to do its job. I wouldn't be surprised to see > legislation to have us all branded with a "666" next session. I just don't understand what you're talking about -- in this dicusssion, I think it is obvious which party is short on scruples, and it ain't the gov't... /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- -- ---------------------------------------- ALL messages to the list MUST include a descriptive subject. To Change your email Address for this list, send the following message: CHANGE WIN-HOME your_old_address your_new_address to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note carefully that both old and new addresses are required.
