Quote:
Originally Posted by V_RocKs
Gideon should write mainstream blogs because that fucker is one hell of a windbag about shit he knows nothing about..
|
the only reason you think i don't know anything about piracy is because of your bias
Your analogy of theft to piracy is applying a physical criminal act to a virtual criminal act.
When i applied physical rights to virtual rights robbie attacked me saying that the anology was wrong, the point is it was your anology i was using.
[QUOTE]....You aren't BUYING anything. So how can you analogize that to GM selling me a fucking car?
[QUOTE]
think about for a second , you can't buy content (only licience it) which means you can never own the content
the criminality test for theft is possession without ownership.
so what exactly is the concequence of never being able to having ownership (only authorization) to that test.
we both know that liciencing content for tube distribution is not copyright infringment/piracy. So if brazzer was to licience chokers content for their tube site they would not be guilty of piracy
yet if we applied your representation of theft and the criminality test that goes with it to this 100% legal transaction
brazzer would have possession (true) and not have ownership (!False =true)
both conditions would be true, therefore they would be guilty of theft and thru your equality guilty of piracy.
this should have rung bells in your head saying "ding ding ding piracy is not theft"
because the condition of transaction (no ownership only authorization) makes you guilty even when you are 100% innocent.
Apply the test of fraud
distribution with a misrepresentation of authorization
distribution (true) with a misrepresentation of authorization (false)
results in the correct answer not guilty of piracy.
your bias blinds you to the fact that your test makes everyone guilty, while mine comes to the right answer when you are actually innocent.