As the one who directly responded to Matt about the Lessig issue, I still stand by my statement. Indeed, many of the thoughts in Matt's post did in fact occur

As the one who directly responded to Matt about the Lessig issue, I still stand by my statement. Indeed, many of the thoughts in Matt's post did in fact occur to me, and I still decided to make the argument that suing Lessig is a bad idea. I find it amusing that Matt decides to believe with no evidence that my views and the views of others are not thought out. On a different note, I agree with the idiocy of arguing about fair use without any background in it. You will however see that I never brought up fair use in my writing. All and all, I'd say that Matt has badly mischaracterized the discussion that went on. I invite you to review it for yourself. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=586154 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=586154 Also Matt, something to consider about the Lessig issue. Even if he loses, Warner's loss will be bigger. The more exposure the public gets to big business's senseless ideas about copyright, the quicker it will be killed off. When did RIAA's suits against individuals stop? When some court cases got serious publicity. The RIAA won the court cases in question, but what mattered more was the fact that the public was exposed to what was going on. The current iteration of copyright law and precedent is outdated and eventually it is all going to change. In the mean time they should just keep quiet and earn as much money as they can off of an outdated system. Suing Lessig strikes me as an effort to change the direction copyright reform is moving in. That simply is not going to happen.