Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dont buy that. Please explain why that would be good? If the music companies win then perhaps the idiot pirates start to acutally get scared. Then us sensible lot can sit down with the companies and get them to do things right. Stuff is moving in the right direction (Apple going non-DRM for instance) these guys are dinosaurs and holding things back. Send em down. I fail to see how anyone can condone TPB ever.... th…
It would be good because it will cause far more attention than the reverse verdict, and there will be some people who would otherwise have feared unspecific consequences for sharing who will thereby be reassured. It's a PR victory for the forces of anti-copyright (and, to a lesser extent, copyleft), and a conviction would be a draw (there's no way that the music companies can actually win, as far as I can see). I'm i…
In the face of that could we expect media companies to be reasonable and sit at the table to work out new ways to provide access to digital media/software? This is not a 2 sided battle in my eyes. TPB are as much an enemy to the consumer as the IPFI.
And why shouldnt the sharers get some fear? Perhaps it will dissuade them from sharing. Bearing in mind I am massivley pro copyright (as a software developer and writer - even though the majority of my work is open source).
In terms of copyright - I too am not too worried by DRM. I would like to see DRM dropped but can understand why it is there. In the Apple case they had to impose stupidly strict DRM just to get the store off the ground. The fact they can now release that music more freely is a testamount to how much the music companies are starting to come round to the consumers viewpoint. I am never one to blame the music companies for wanting to protect their material: even though I do disagree with the prices they charge, how they screw over the artists and how they insist (till now) on locking stuff up in super restrictive DRM.
I never fully understood the arguments against copyright. Care to explain?