In article <9ihmj3lb1v8vivecuteu8movu9o1c8u9hh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
ShutUpRob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
> On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 17:27:04 +0100, Pete B <xxxh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
> >> If someone copies and DISTRIBUTES such copies, they are breaking
> >> copyright law (and in the case of digital reproduction, the DCMA).
> >
> >So now you wish to change the subject from "it's stealing" to "it is
> >against the law"? If you do that means you agree it is not stealing.
>
> Charging admission without license or copying a copy (bootlegging) is
> stealing in every sense of the word, too.
No.
> I think that the DCMA goes
> *far* beyond the scope of reason in shutting down the fair use private
> copying, but that doesn't make retransmission of any digital copy any
> less the stealing that it is.
You can repeat it, but it isn't.
> Which, btw, is a large part of the reason that DVD and successor
> "hard" copies -- recorded objects, whether it's DVD, data crystals,
> whatever -- won't disappear even though the studios want to try to
> make them disappear in order to control access and charge admission
> for every single access of every single TV show or movie. Books,
> comics, newspapers and magazines haven't disappeared just because the
> Internets exist.
Yet! It's early days, the internet is young. I'm seeing magazines I've
subsribed to are stopping because nobody is buying them anymore.
And fx
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/01/business/media/01paper.html?ex=
1335672000&en=9a30c5d84f7cf105&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
"Circulation figures have dropped gradually for two decades, beginning
in the 1980s, but since 2004, the decline has picked up speed as readers
and advertisers have migrated to the Internet."
> And the more that the cor****ations try to charge
> access fees for every single access of a given property, the more the
> public will get fed up with them ala the original DivX fiasco, but on
> a much larger scale of magnitude.
One can only hope.
|
