3 ms·
Sure. And I'm in no way arguing for that notion. What I am arguing against is confusing the theft of a copy or object with interfering with said right, legitima
by Kliment 16y ago
Sure. And I'm in no way arguing for that notion. What I am arguing against is confusing the theft of a copy or object with interfering with said right, legitimate or not. My point is that you have not deprived the owner of the copy/object/medium of anything, but that is a straw man. The real question is whether these rights, which are in fact being violated by the reproduction, are legitimate. I agree with you that they are generally not, from my own moral perspective at least.