And it does for obvious reasons all related to the difference between physical things and information.
This is an information conversation, not a physical one.
Two things:
1. Infringing is wrong. You seem to be attempting to sell me on that it's wrong.
No need for that. It is. Well, until it isn't, and that's up to the content creator really. Some choose to allow infringing uses and will actually source them, thus transforming them into non-infringing uses more than they are infringing ones, and they get value for doing that.
It's important that model be possible. See Doctorow, Lessig, et al. for how and why that works.
Some content creators are opposed, and infringing on them is wrong.
But how that actually works is where the discussion is.
Sometimes we allow infringing for fair uses, despite opposition from content creators too.
The dialog is more subtle than these "it's wrong" physical analogies account for, and where that continues to be true, we have an incomplete discussion, and with that, an ongoing mess and I submit, non-optimal revenue and opportunity for same.
2. Where we are clashing and that is information does not operate on the same terms as physical things do. You seem to be attempting to get me to equate the two, and I'm just not gonna do that.
They aren't the same and they don't operate in the same ways.
And it does for obvious reasons all related to the difference between physical things and information.
This is an information conversation, not a physical one.
Two things:
1. Infringing is wrong. You seem to be attempting to sell me on that it's wrong.
No need for that. It is. Well, until it isn't, and that's up to the content creator really. Some choose to allow infringing uses and will actually source them, thus transforming them into non-infringing uses more than they are infringing ones, and they get value for doing that.
It's important that model be possible. See Doctorow, Lessig, et al. for how and why that works.
Some content creators are opposed, and infringing on them is wrong.
But how that actually works is where the discussion is.
Sometimes we allow infringing for fair uses, despite opposition from content creators too.
The dialog is more subtle than these "it's wrong" physical analogies account for, and where that continues to be true, we have an incomplete discussion, and with that, an ongoing mess and I submit, non-optimal revenue and opportunity for same.
2. Where we are clashing and that is information does not operate on the same terms as physical things do. You seem to be attempting to get me to equate the two, and I'm just not gonna do that.
They aren't the same and they don't operate in the same ways.