29 Oct
2012
29 Oct
'12
2:46 p.m.
> Do you not understand that I said
"unauthorized"?; I did not say
> "illegal"
> THAT is not relevant to US. We really DON'T CARE.
On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Mouse wrote:
If your "THAT" is "illegal", then
at least some of us _do_ care. I for
one care whether a particular copy-making is legal or not.
Not quite/ "THAT" was arguments about legality/ethics of copy-protection.
We DO care, but don't want this list as a venue for an off-topic argument
that will NEVER end. "piracy" software and devices are necessary for
making legal unauthorized copies.
Of course, just because something can be used to
perform illegal
actions doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the thing, any more
than a hammer should be illegal just because you can bash out someone's
brains with it.
. . . or walk down the street at night carrying a pry-bar.
In the Sony V MGM(?) lawsuit, the court held that that technology could
not be barred ig it was "capableof sunbstantial noninfringing use". Even
though 99.99% of all VCR usage was making copies, a Betamax COULD be used
for home porno, birthdays, etc.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com