Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury

[applejuicekid]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
how dumb can people be? arhg reading this just puts me on stone cold ape tilt

how can anyone not admit it's stealing. i can at least respect those who are honest with themselves.

is sneaking into an art museum stealing?

[/ QUOTE ]

that would be trespassing. why would it be stealing?

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't know about the definition of which crime it is i'm just saying by trespassing you are basically taking money out of the museum's pocket.

[/ QUOTE ]

obv but its still not stealing

[/ QUOTE ]

whatever, it's a crime that's what i'm saying. the analogy is that you're not really "taking" anything from the museum yet you're basically taking money out of the museum's pocket, even if you would never buy a ticket and enter legally.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, but it is totally different because the museum can't hold an infinite amount of people like copying an mp3. It's more like if someone was charging people to watch a movie in a park, would you be stealing if you watched the movie from across the street?

[/ QUOTE ]


No. There is no right to ask others to not look at my property, except *I think* in stuff like voyeurism. But, rights to privacy, as far as I know, dont extend to things that are outdoors.

As the property owner of a song, its up to me how I want is distributed.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok...you are right. I was trying to think of an example using the museum analogy that doesn't involve trespassing or limit the number of customers they can serve. I'm pretty sure if you came up with a valid analogy it would support the anti-IP position.