Re: Re: Re: Number of people employed at McDonald's may be all-time high too.
"do you even understand what a 'natural right' is ?
clearly you do not."
Your screed has left me thinking the same thing about you.
"is it your natural right not to be mugged ?
is it your natural right not to be murdered ?
or to have your car stolen or your wife raped ?"
Why on earth do copyright maximalists always insist on bringing murder and rape into a discussion about copying, as if they're anywhere close to each other in significance. There is nothing, NOTHING, you can create that is significant enough to compare it's copying to murder and rape. The comparison makes you look like an over-entitled fool.
"copyright and the protection of idea's is also not contingent on specific laws and are in fact 'inalienable' rights..."
This is simply false, and I again ask for any credible source for this claim.
"You write a book you have a natural right not to have that stolen from you..."
Society has long agreed that it is wrong to physically take that book away from you and deprive you of its use, i.e. steal it. Copying is completely different, as is society's attitude to it.
"...and copying something and reducing any profits made from that creation is theft."
That is simply not the definition of theft, not by any dictionary, legal or common-sense meaning of the word. There is no natural or legal right guaranteeing a profit. Profit is something you earn by convincing people to pay more for your product or service than it costs you to provide.
"Kim Dotcom got all those cars and his mansion how again?"
By providing a service that millions of people around the world considered worth paying money for. You should try it some time.
And even if you went along with your provably false statement that MU was a genuine 100% piracy site, your one solitary example proves very little. The claim is that lots of piracy sites are getting rich, but you have no other examples.
"You pirate douchebags are hilarious."
And your attitude to the very people whose behaviour you want to change is hilariously stupid. Why would I listen to anybody who calls me names?
"Enforcement will never touch soulless, thieving freeloaders such as yourself."
Note that this person is acting on behalf of large, soulless, morally bankrupt corporations who claim to represent artists. This is a the language of a corporate thug, not actual creative artists. The dollar we are accused us of "stealing" was not taken out of the pocket of an artist, but from someone who gives as little as practically possible to those artists. So these insults will not illicit guilt or shame or behavioural change or one penny of extra income, because these companies deserve none of that.
And by winning, you mean fucking over the public for the gain of your corporate masters. With that sort of amoral attitude, it's incredibly galling for you to talk about the "immoral" behaviour of copyright infringement
And you've yet to prove that even once. If you had, you might get a shred of respect around here, but you have never once proven Mike to by lying about anything. And no sorry, saying something you don't agree with is not lying.