Andrew, Please don't take it the wrong way, but you seem to have a strange idea of what a "discussion" is about.... Have you not been sent to BBC re-education camp yet?
By saying "That's all I'm going to stay. There is no point in even debating the subject" you make Auntie seem like Fox News! On 16/08/07, Andrew Bowden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 15/08/07, Andrew Bowden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > If a drinks company is giving away a can of drink free at a railway > > station (which happens), does that entitle you to go into Sainsburys and > > take one without paying for it? > > > > No, that would be stealing, I would be depriving the original owners of a > can of drink, What I would do isn't stealing, no one loses anything, or are > you one of those people who wilfully spreads the misconception that > copyright infringement = theft? > If you are, well it doesn't. One deprives someone of a tangeable object, > that actually costs something to distribute, the other is data that can, and > is, being distributed virtually for free. > > My point is nothing but simple. Just because it can be done one way, > doesn't mean it should. That's all. > > The general population have an interesting respect laws and rules - demand > complete and total implementation of the ones they really like, whilst > ignoring the ones they don't. You only have to look at how many people > break the speed limit to see that. > > That's all I'm going to stay. There is no point in even debating the > subject - you have your view and you're clearly right. And that's that. > -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv
