View Single Post
Old 21st July 2012
  #1833
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
The difference is your strong view that no one should subvert copyright to suit their own agenda. My reality is I accept people will infringe on copyright ('subvert' the law), just like they fiddle the odd tax receipt, and drive over the speed limit.
I can understand this distinction as a answer to the clarity that I asked for in a previous post. In response, I would say that the nature of the general acceptance for minor violations that you reference above (and of their equivalent in terms of copyright) strays into the realm of enforcement (or lack thereof when inappropriate for minor trespass), which I purposefully avoided addressing (partially in adherence to the forum guidelines). When pressed, however, I will say that I do not take so uncompromising a view in that regard; rest assured that I was only outlining the general theory of and justification for copyright, rather than prescribing the extent to which it must be enforced in order to have functional value.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I see you as more hardcore because you post things like "An individual who disagrees with the public consensus on the treatment of these works, as embodied in the form of democratic law, is not entitled to therefore subvert it" and seems to assume that's what musicians are trying to do.... 'subvert' the 'public consensus'.
I am happy to in turn clarify, then, that you are quite surely inferring far too much from the post in which the quote originates. I can tell you without hesitation that I make no such assumption (nor intend to convey such assumption) as you describe here.