[Defiant]

Arrogance to some is simply someone who knows whereof they speak, and who tries to explain a simple truth to those who do not. Strategorist has been pretty straightforward on this thread, and he's exactly right. It's not something that is debatable, no matter how distasteful you find Hollyweird films these days. It's a matter of property rights. Films, books and songs are a form of property. When you create a work, it belongs to you. You are entitled by our laws to control that work. It's how our system works. You may not like that, but that's the plain fact. And our system works pretty well, generating the best the world has ever seen in creative endeavors, as well as in technological pursuits.

[Binghamton_native]

Arrogance to some is simply someone who knows whereof they speak, and who tries to explain a simple truth to those who do not.

Civil discourse can be conducted without ad hominem attacks. Having said that, and having read the court filings, unless someone on this thread is a lawyer specialiazing in copyright law, this is a Court decision, not a writ from heaven. As conservatives we have seen many court decisions that we disagree with. That is all folks like myself are trying to say here. Yes, the studios have won. Was it a correct decision? Well, the court says it is.

[linda_22003]

I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I've gotten this far, and this is the clearest post yet on the subject. Bravo.

[rockrr]

BS.

Arrogance is arrogance.

I would submit that Strategorist (sic) may have a point, but that point is lost in that presentation.

And, with the advent of digital media, copyright is an area that is very much in flux.

When all we had was print media I would be perfectly content to purchase a copy of someone's work, modify that copy and resell it without fear of recourse. Say, for example, that I happen to be a celebrity and autograph or annotate the volume. I could likely resell the volume for more than the original purchase price. As long as I do not purport to take credit for the original author's work it is entirely legal.

It is more of a gray area in digital rights law. And I would say that it is by no means settled yet.