Why don't you go and learn what a straw man is before failing again to actually explain your side of the argument. YOu have yet to answer the question and your continued attempt at labelling everything that anyone says that you don't like as a 'straw man' is laughable.
Like Pundit, you think you can raise a point not made by the other side and demand they answer for it or defend it. It is pathetic and a very weak debate tactic. This thread has had many arguments made and I most certainly have not “labeled everything anyone said” that I dislike a straw man. Even your rhetoric is the suck.
As was said in the very quote you label as a 'straw man', the industry is still in business despite what you call 'rampant piracy'. So what then is the problem? And while you explain that, perhaps you could also justify the costly unethical exploitation of the artists working within, if the rights of the artist and the profits of the industry are so important to you.
Or are you, as I suspect, just a sad reactionary.
Again, what is your point? It seems to be that as long as a company makes
some money, they can’t be being hurt by piracy. Toss in an accusation of how they are mean companies and then you have validity for the piracy too.
You spend a huge portion of a thread trying to tell us piracy is not really a bad thing, and should be accepted. Then, when things simply don’t go your way, you switch gears and instead go with piracy simply has no effect on things, you see these companies are still making money and, by the way, they are mean to their workers.
PS: Saying I must “justify the costly unethical exploitation of the artists working within, if the rights of the artist and the profits of the industry are so important to you” is a fucking
STRAW MAN.
A music company could the biggest dicks on the planet, stealing their stuff isn’t right.
If business is still in business then what is the problem. That's what I asked you. Don't avoid the fucking question and twist what people are saying. I have never once justified downloading or whatever in the way you are saying, that's your inference. But then I'm not the one who views the world in such simple minded reactionary and anachronistic terms.
Umm… ok. Are you not saying that piracy is ok as long as a company is in the black? Are you not saying it is ok because you think the guys in the suits are mean? If it’s not, then I’d suggest working real hard on trying to come up with some new points because that’s exactly how you’re sounding.
Do grow up.
You’re being asked to clarify statements you have made. Maybe when they are put back to you you’ve realized how inane the comments were and now wish to disown them.
Your insistence in assuming that identity theft is the same as filesharing is so beyond stupid that explaining for a third time what the differences are would be a waste of time. You I suspect don't want to know and insist on these flawed examples to try and make a point, while ignoring the fact that even if I believed that my details, were i to be stupid enough to post them on here, would not fall into the hands of people who would use them to shaft me (by committing, amongst other things, actual theft), I still wouldn't give them to you. Why? Because you are a fucking cock.
Actually, I am just calling you on your assertion that you didn’t care if someone had your bank information because, as you stated, they themselves didn’t make you money. Much like Pundit you profess very strong convictions that you won’t even give lip service to yourself.
But, even here, you raise a straw man, attributing and argument not made. I never said “identity theft is the same as file sharing”. I didn’t. Identity theft was used to show how the notion, that you did make, that as long as one remained in possession of the data, the copying of said data did not cause harm nor should be considered a bad thing.
That assumes I trust that you (a prize imbecile of spectacular proportions) and everyone else with access to this site, is entirely truistworthy.
So, your claim about not caring about it was a blatant lie, correct?
You really don't understand the concept of identity theft do you. Dimwit.
I do, it’s the taking of something (not necessarily physical) that doesn’t belong to you.
THere are lots of laws that, by breaking them, don't detract from anyone's quality of life. You have yet to provide any evidence that filesharing equates to lost earnings when in fact it is more likely to increase earnings. That is the morality we are now dealing with, so you can keep your pathetic 'law'. Law doesn't = morality and copyright law exists only to protect financial self interest. Hardly moral.
If filesharing, as you claim, is likely to “increase earnings” why have music sales continued to slump while filesharing has continued to increase? I have shown statistics that show decreased sales, for music in particular, while you’ve simply claimed a few things, dismissed what you didn’t like, built straw men, and demanded things of others you wouldn’t even try yourself.
You keep wavering between the concept that piracy should be illegal and piracy doesn’t really hurt anyone. It’s like you know the points are untenable so you hope that by shifting between each quickly you’ll never have to defend either.