I think in the context of this discussion copyright was developed to protect middlemen's investments. Creators were not in the business of printing and publishing (they just create), so they had to sell the rights to a third party who could do the printing and marketing. And to make it fair to that publisher, they restricted other publishers with copyright laws and the threat of punishment for violations.
It is the same mentality you have with things like the 2012 London Olympics brand police. Other parties are paying "good money" to to advertise their brands so they need to stop others from "free riding." Or with licencing of music, films, TV. Licencees are paying money to monetize content so they and/or the licencor want to stop others from doing the same for free: YouTube takedowns, ICE domain seizures, etc.
But today creators can do it all just by hiring services (TuneCore, CDBaby, Amazon, fabrication in China, etc) that need to compete in the market for customers (it does not make sense financially for them to get exclusive deals, for example, they are just a service provider), so there is no middleman and his army of trolls.
Gibson his this coming. They have pissed off a lot of people. They hate innovation and try to squash it where they can. They kill jobs by acquiring companies and then firing everyone. Juszkiewicz, karma is a bitch, isn't it?
All I can hear is the horn stabs in the original track that start at 1:46 are at least the same chord as used throughout Vogue that first appear at 0:56. I don't see how they are hidden. All of the string parts in Vogue are either live recorded strings or a synth. If Pettibone had access to the original multi tracks maybe he could have used the string sound but it is just a long-sustaining chord.
Imagine if the rights holder of James Brown's recordings sued everyone who used the horn stabs in Get Up Offa that Thing. That would be insanity.
Has anyone seen the Citibank commercial where they use their points to rent a large outdoor TV to watch the Olympics? Somehow I think the Olympic trademark police would find this truly offensive if anyone did it in real life. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpQ5Ew3YnKs
It is a public declaration. An anonymous declaration is meaningless. If you do not wish to publicly declare your support of privacy then you don't believe that strongly anyway. By publicly declaring you support privacy does not mean you give up privacy in other forums. But you are probably just one of the regular AC troll anyway.
"I publicly declare a right to privacy!" said the AC. No, your doing it wrong.