Zipperfish Zipperfish:
PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:
Walmart doesn't charge you a fee to shop at Target either. Yet if I buy blank cds for non-piracy purposes, I still get to pay the recording industry a fee for something they didn't produce and have nothing to do with. Why? If they have the ability to invade someone's privacy and sue them for illegal downloading, why do they need to keep getting that fee on recordable media? That's basically institutionalized theft.
I mean what's next? Is the recording industry going to start demanding extra fees on playback devices because people can listen to/watch pirated material on them? Or computers because they can be used for downloading?
You've obvious convinced yourself that your stealing is actually an act of virtuous rebellion.
That wouldn't be a strawman if I was actually illegally downloading music, or movies, or games. It is, I'm not. I'm arguing the ridiculousness of an industry that's almost as sleazy as the oil industry, whining about how they're getting screwed while they continue to screw "artists" and real artists out of the money the industry complains people are screwing them out of.
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
If you are using the CDs to store your stolen music, then they should be charging a fee. If you weren't stealing music, you'd have a strnger argument. As it is, you're just justifying it.
I just said, "If I buy them for NON-piracy purposes...".
Let me ask you this, should libraries be shut down? As I said earlier, they are nothing but buildings that exist for the sole purpose of "file sharing".
What if a library got a hold of your cave music cd through a legitimate transaction and put it up to lend out, would it be theft when someone borrows it?
Is it theft when I can take out a book from the library pretty much anytime I want and read it without paying for it?
I wonder how many millions of dollars authors have lost because of libraries?
CKA Uber 
CKA Super Elite 
CKA Moderator 
