Court sinks pirates’ net profits By The Lawyer 7 May 2012 00:00 17 December 2015 13:10 Sign in or register to continue reading. It's FREE Sign in Email Password Keep me logged in Forgot your password? Not registered? It's FREE! Register now Register with The Lawyer anonymous 8 May 2012 at 12:17 but of course the legal meanderings and musings neatly sidesteps the differential between the rights of purchasers of copyrighted material over the right of the original material. I contend that, once an item has been legitimately purchased, whether it be a physical disk, or a digital representation of the original work. the value of the protected work declines proportionate to the number of copies sold or distributed, what the “copyright” industry is seeking is not to protect copyrighted material but rather. to use the complexities and ambiguities inherent in copyright law to censor the distribution of information or culture.. if one looks closely at a number of “pirated” materials, (particularly in the comment fields in the pirate bay) the ultimate recipient is encouraged by the seeder to support the original copyright holder by purchasing a physical or updated copy or said copyrighted work. also we should not forget that numerous bogus breaches of copyright have been claimed in order to bolster justification for blocking measures, which indicates that the”entertainment” industry are not of themselves innocent of any fraud, misrepresentation. deceit. or dishonesty in their dealings.Having said that , there are those in the field that are seeking a middle ground but they are by and large gagged by the big guns. Reply Link dida 8 May 2012 at 14:19 mind the source…. Reply Link Anonymous 8 May 2012 at 14:36 What you say is tantamount to telling me I can block my street at both ends to protect my property, never mind the other residents. Links at PirateBay aren’t all to the so-called illegal downloads the media rant about. Many go [=or used to go before the censorship] there to download pictures (no, not porn), utilities, desktop themes etc, which aren’t copyrighted. Reply Link Michael G 9 May 2012 at 12:03 Note that this article was written by the BPI’s counsel… So don’t be surprised by gist of what m’Learned frined, MrWhitehead, says… Reply Link anonymous 9 May 2012 at 16:57 So what you’re saying is that, rather than adapt to the new technology medium, the copyright mafia (aka the entertainment industry) should instead stifle it so that they can drain every last penny from their economic rent seeking. Meanwhile Western governments will inevitably use copyright as a useful stalking horse to “regulate” (aka censor) the Internet like their compatriots in China and Iran. No thanks. Reply Link Anonymous 9 May 2012 at 23:17 “taking something without consent is wrong.” At the risk of poking a hole in your sententious logic , making a copy of a digital file is not “taking something” as the original file remains where it is. Reply Link Anonymous 24 May 2012 at 17:47 @ Anonymous | 9 May 2012 | 11:17pm If you’re going to criticise the article’s logic as being sententious, you haven’t given the issue any real thought. Making an illegal copy of a digital file deprives the creator of the original of the right to be rewarded for what he/she has created. Is that not enough of a moral argument for you? Obviously it’s not exactly the same as taking a tin of beans off the supermarket shelf – that’s the lazy analogy you have either fallen for or are peddling as an excuse to avoid rewarding creators of music, film, books, games, etc. Reply Link Anonymous 15 May 2013 at 05:20 So what bpi counsel blowing its own trumpet Reply Link Name Email Cancel reply Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.