5 ms·
It's within the rights of the Arabs to not broadcast, and within the rights of Eurovision to not allow them to participate. Are you suggesting that we should f
by brobdingnagians 7y ago
It's within the rights of the Arabs to not broadcast, and within the rights of Eurovision to not allow them to participate.
Are you suggesting that we should force people to watch things they don't agree with?
That isn't exactly what you said, but seems to suggest it.
I agree that taking the movie, editing it, copying it, and selling it-- is and should be illegal. But other solutions like client side indices of what to skip or mute don't harm the producer and are not editing of the copyrighted material itself.
- swebs 7y ago>I agree that taking the movie, editing it, copying it, and selling it-- is and should be illegal. I don't see why it should be illegal at all. Assuming: 1) The original owner gets paid for each copy sold 2) End customers are clearly informed that the edited version has been edited.
- pjc50 7y ago> Are you suggesting that we should force people to watch things they don't agree with? That is explicitly what I'm avoiding saying, because obviously that's an illiberal and unworkable idea. In fact, I'm not trying to mandate anything at all. Not every observation is a criticism, not every criticism is a threat.
- brobdingnagians 7y agoWell said.
- michaelt 7y ago> Are you suggesting that we should force people to watch things they don't agree with? That isn't exactly what you said, but seems to suggest it. It's more complicated than that. The right not to listen to things you don't like applies equally to someone who doesn't listen to rap music because too much of it demeans women; and someone who doesn't listen to rap music because too much of it is by black people. But if those two people announce those tastes in public, they should expect different responses for obvious reasons!