
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 07:52:25 -0600, Jer used
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to say...
Kurt Hamster wrote:
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 22:44:44 -0600, Jer used <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to say...
Oh, I get it. You're now gonna try to make us believe you're not subject to the international rules of copyright protections, aren't ya?
So you are the dumb fuck you purport to be.
To be covered by the copywrite of a particular recording then you must be legally deemed to be in agreeance with the licensing of the product.
That agreeance is deemed to be complete on the purchase of that product (it's an implicit part of the contract of sale).
So, if you don't like how a copyrighted work is licensed, you're not bound to the terms of it's sale? Considering your agreement to it's terms of sale were required to purchase, how is it you're not bound to it's implicit obligations?
What does not liking something have anything to do with what I wrote?
Now if you are borrowing that product from a friend then you haven't made a legal commitment to the licensing of that product, therefore you are not in breach of that license, ergo you aren't in breach of copywrite.
Then explain how it is that having a copy of a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder is not a breach of international copyright law.
Duh. Read what I wrote again. obClue: "licensing".
Remember you fuckwit, we aren't all dumb yanks.
Neither am I.
Dumb or a yank?
-- jer email reply - I am not a 'ten' ICQ = 35253273 "All that we do is touched with ocean, yet we remain on the shore of what we know." -- Richard Wilbur
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |