Comments on: BSA UK ’settlement’ increases

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 19 Feb 2006 16:47:21 +0000

“If Big Content’s spinmeisters are continued to be allowed to get away with slipping these specious assertions into their press”

The label use to be “communism”, whose problem was political corruption as was/is a problem with capitalism. It went mostly unchallenged. The populance swallowed the label. Now it is terrorism. All for political purposes.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 19 Feb 2006 16:46:36 +0000

“If Big Content’s spinmeisters are continued to be allowed to get away with slipping these specious assertions into their press”

Yhe label use to be “communism”, whose problem was political corruption as was/is a problem with capitalism. It went mostly unchallenged. The populance swallowed the label. Now it is terrorism. All for political purposes.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:30:13 +0000

Persionaly I think music business douse more to promote pedophiles, why simple look at there PR/Video’s there one thing which they are using more and more. I am talking about legs and the brests of star to sell some music, why have they got to have close up’s legs etc durring video’s. As such teenage girls think that why they have to dress to get an boy.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 17 Feb 2006 12:45:10 +0000

The last two paragraphs on the article at silicon.com read as follows:

–quote–
Paul Ramsden, deputy CEO at the Trading Standards Institute, added that software piracy is not a victimless crime and the proceeds help fund much more serious crimes.

He said: “These people we are dealing with aren’t local criminals. This is big business. It funds terrorist organisations.”

–end quote–

Once again, we see the terrorist boogeyman card being played in the context of copyright infringement. So far there has been NO solid evidence uncovered connecting copyright infringement of entertainment content or software with terrorism. Careful review of any such anecdotal reports would indicate that infringement was only incidental to any alleged terrorist activity. Typically, it was found that the computer of an alleged terrorism suspect had one or more software packages that were infringing copies of copyrighted works. I would submit that this doesn’t even come close to supporting the contention that copyright infringement FUNDS terrorist activites, no more than it supports kiddie porn and pedophiles because the latter might use infringing copies of video and image editing software.

If Big Content’s spinmeisters are continued to be allowed to get away with slipping these specious assertions into their press releases and they go unchallenged, these fallacies will eventually be accepted as the truth and will result in a reluctance to put constraints on Big Content’s demands for additional government mandated control mechanism and more draconian consequences for copyright infringement. Eventually it will be the p2p users and those who develop tools for p2p that will be branded as ‘terrorists’.

–Turbogeek