Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
Re: Supply and Demand said by MyDogHsFleas:This is just a bass-ackwards way of looking at the issue. You start by assuming that piracy is the way it is, and enforcing copyright laws is some weird new stupid idea (i.e. "continuing their business model by force".)
...
Rather than "continuing their business model by force", they are trying to assert their historic rights of ownership under copyright, as has been going on for centuries.
I guess who is bass ackwards depends on which which way you are facing 
Piracy IS the way it is... not by my assumption but by reality. If it weren't, we wouldn't be having this conversation. And they are not simply trying to assert their historic rights, they are trying to gain more and more rights to increase their revenues even further. It is what the shareholder primacy doctrine demands. The copyright laws have changed so much since their 'historic' times that they bear almost no resemblance to the original intent. How long was the original copyright term? How long is it now?
Again this is bass-ackwards. The fact that some artists release their works for free (or at least some of their works), and that some artists sell direct to the public through the Internet bypassing the record companies, does NOT lead one to the conclusion that free copying of works SHOULD BE THE LAW (or at least the accepted practice). This like saying some stores are online only so ALL stores MUST be online only. It's the choice of an artist or a store which way to go! Don't make it mandatory just because you happen to like one or the other. Choose with your dollars and your attention.
|
