In Reply to: My sympathies are precisely the same. posted by markrohr on March 23, 2007 at 10:00:31:
Not prior to the Audio Home Recording Act. It was copyright infringement.You are still insinuating that I am offering rationalizations for theft.
How would you feel if such an unwarranted charge were directed at you?
If you ever, even once, made a recording from a radio or turntable onto a blank cassette prior to 1992, then you were, as you say, 'stealing' as well.
As I said, throwing around the term 'theft' when it does not technically apply merely muddies the debate & does a disservice to everyone involved. Except, of course, the downloaders engaged in copyright infringement, who should be held accountable for their actions.
But I object to the harassment of innocent people to achieve this end.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- It was NOT fair use - J 10:05:17 03/23/07 (11)
- "I object to the harassment of innocent people to achieve this end" - markrohr 10:13:03 03/23/07 (10)
- It's not a case by case basis, - but an aspect of the fair use law -t - Sordidman 12:20:37 03/23/07 (0)
- If you did - J 10:28:44 03/23/07 (8)
- Look, J - markrohr 11:54:24 03/23/07 (7)
- Wrong - J 14:01:13 03/23/07 (6)
- "morality is difficult to define when the law has not done so" - Todd B. 02:15:55 03/25/07 (1)
- Ahh... - J 14:13:45 03/25/07 (0)
- Great post J - Sordidman 20:23:00 03/23/07 (3)
- Here's the thing - J 13:47:03 03/24/07 (2)
- Yep.... - Sordidman 11:08:03 03/26/07 (1)
- Re: Yep.... - J 15:06:42 03/26/07 (0)