In which case, there's no point in taking this conversation further, for two reasons. First, you're also ethically opposed to the existence of the BBC - an organisation which exists because copyright material exists,
I thought the purpose of the BBC was to "inform, educate and entertain". none of those *require* copyright. Granted, copyright makes it much easier, but your statement is misleading. I don't know about Dave, but my problem with copyright law is the length of time it lasts. IMO all works should fall into the public domain after 25 years; but that's another debate entirely Vijay.
