get a dictionary and quit trying to move the issue. You also don't seem to understand the difference between a professional who plays for pay and a rank amateur who plays with his pecker. Don't be a doofus, you know we are talking about professionals here. Exactly. So when you "steal" from an artist who sells his work, then you are making a victim, being wrong, and being a thief. No . . . THEM. The artist gets to say whether he's giving his work away or selling, just as you can decide to give away or sell your potatoes. If you are giving them away, I'll come over take plenty for me and all my friends. If you are selling them, then I'll pay you for only what I need. The creator always gets the call. It was not legally protected before the laws. You had to take enforcement into your own hands.
you are right i don t understand the difference. of course. so dont repeat any jokes you hear from professional comedians. you are taking food out of their mouths. they are pros that sell their work. you cant control ones and zeroes like that. you cant arrange ones and zeros in a particular fashion and own them any more than you can own a particular number or equation. yeah it is a wonder beethoven even bothered with music back when he couldnt profit from selling records.
Of course. Remember this. I have lectured you at length about the concept of fair use but you still don't get it. You can repeat a Richard Pryor joke, you can sing a John Lennon song, you can recite an Ayn Rand diatribe. Fair use. But you cannot duplicate a Richard Pryor DVD, a John Lennon CD, or a Ayn Rand book without paying for it. Actually some of her work is entering the public domain and you can do as you wish. But some is protected by copyright and you can't. More bullchit unrelated to the topic. I think you are about done. Beethoven profited from publishing copyrighted sheet music, which was the music media of his day.
Not applicable. Fair use is not taking anything away from the creator. The creator owns the rights to his performances, recordings, and to publish music, audio, or video. The legal purchaser of this material is certainly allowed to play it, sing, it, and enjoy it as it was intended. Under fair use the user also can except portions of it for commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship. But he cannot duplicate the product or excerpt and republish large portions of it.
The word “STEALING” is not sharing and sharing is the issue here. If I purchase a song and CHOOSE to share it, im a dirty thief I guess….
correct. i have been trying to explain this to red for years and he still pretend i am alone in my thinking. i thing most folks under 40 or so somewhat agree with me, and almost everyone under 30 agrees. yes, and red thinks his use of the word "thief" means he wins the argument.
Stealing is not applicable in fair use. Because it is fair use, a principle with a 400 year history. Look it up. Like a 3-year-old, you keep asking why. Because I'm the mommy, that's why.
