> For most things to appear on BT or elsewhere, someone has to buy them first, too. Your argument, therefore, is invalid. The difference is that the book still

> For most things to appear on BT or elsewhere, someone has to buy them first, too. Your argument, therefore, is invalid. The difference is that the book still only exists as one copy that is transferred from one entity to another. This is fair use. That is the same reason it is ok to give/sell your cd to someone else. You have relinquished ownership of it and passed it to someone else. That is how the used goods market works. That does not include making copies of something to distribute. My argument about books is not invalid. It was my mistake to use the word "creator" instead of "source". Yes, the creator generally does not benefit as such. That is between him and the label/distributor/etc. How noble of you to stick up for the underpaid content creator by not paying for the result of his work at all. I applaud you, sir. For everything else you said... heard it before. Don't buy it. It is all just rationalizing the behavior.