Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery
They want to crush that level of comentary, put it in a box and therefore limit unlimited creation that would destroy the monopoly (need permission to create).
|
You like to argue that since torrents (or file sharing sites or whatever) may contain at least some non-infringing material that the service must be viewed as legal. Only if ALL of the content is infringing should the site be considered contributory to infringement.
How is it then that in your logic an action from a significant minority (basically a handful) of copyright holders becomes the de facto standard for all of this so-called "copyright industry."
There are FAR fewer copyright holders engaged in such practices as IP-hunting than those that are. There are FAR fewer copyright holders complaining about legitimate fair use rights than those that are (especially since appropriate commentary of a work almost always INCREASES sales -- copyright holders know this).
When was the last time you saw all copyright holders complain about public libraries buying just a single copy of a book, then letting any just old slob read it for free? You've never seen that, because that's a ridiculous scenario, yet if one idiot publisher argues against libraries, you use it as a "proof" of illegal copyright cartels.